Charalambakis v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 20 December 1978 |
| Citation | 386 N.E.2d 823,413 N.Y.S.2d 912,46 N.Y.2d 785 |
| Parties | , 386 N.E.2d 823 John CHARALAMBAKIS, as parent and natural guardian of Anastasia Charalambakis, an Infant, et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs.
Generally, a notice of claim against a municipality must be filed " within ninety days after the claim arises" (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd. 1). Under the law as it existed when the claim arose in this case, where a claimant because of infancy failed to serve a timely notice of claim, the court, in its discretion, could grant leave to file a late notice of claim (see Matter of Beary v. City of Rye, 44 N.Y.2d 398, 377 N.E.2d 453, 406 N.Y.S.2d 9). The application for leave to so file had to be made "within the period of one year after the happening of the event upon which the claim is based." (General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd. 5, as amd. by L.1976, ch. 745.) In this case the application was concededly not made within this period.
It is argued, however, that the infant was undergoing "continuous treatment" during the period of her visits to the hospital, and therefore that the one-year statutory period did not begin to run until September 25, 1974, the date of her last hospital visit. But the continuous treatment doctrine is applicable only "when the course of treatment which includes the wrongful acts or omissions has run continuously and is related to the same original condition or complaint" (Borgia v. City of New York, 12 N.Y.2d 151, 155, 237 N.Y.S.2d 319, 320, 187 N.E.2d 777, 778). Here, since the infant's visits to the hospital were, so far as averred, merely for routine pediatric examinations, the infant appearing during this period to be in perfect health, the continuous treatment doctrine should not be applied (Davis v. City of New York, 38 N.Y.2d 257, 379 N.Y.S.2d 721, 342 N.E.2d 516).
Order reversed, with costs, and the application to file a late notice of claim denied in a memorandum.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manno v. Levi
...in 1969, for which the drug had been prescribed. Thus, there has been no 'continuous treatment'. Charalambakis v City of New York, 46 NY2d 785 [413 N.Y.S.2d 912, 386 N.E.2d 823] (1978); Borgia v City of New York, 12 NY2d 151 [237 N.Y.S.2d 319, 187 N.E.2d 777] (1962). Should the claim of lac......
-
Matarrese v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corp.
... ... Town of Hoosick, 85 A.D.2d 844, 446 N.Y.S.2d 475, aff'd 58 N.Y.2d 699, 458 N.Y.S.2d 544, 444 N.E.2d 1008). Generally, a notice of claim against a municipality must be served within 90 days after the claim arises (Charalambakis ... v. [215 A.D.2d 14] City of New York, 46 N.Y.2d 785, 413 N.Y.S.2d 912, 386 N.E.2d 823). However, where the claimant is an infant this time period in which to serve a notice of claim is subject to a toll of up to 10 years (Matter of Daniel J. v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 77 N.Y.2d ... ...
-
Marabello v. City of New York
...treatment which includes the wrongful acts or omissions related to his original condition or complaint (Charalambakis v. City of New York, 46 N.Y.2d 785, 413 N.Y.S.2d 912, 386 N.E.2d 823). After being treated for the injuries sustained in the July, 1979 motor vehicle accident, plaintiff mad......
-
Grellet v. City of New York
...including visits for routine examination, do not implicate the continuous treatment doctrine (Charalambakis v. City of New York, 46 N.Y.2d 785, 413 N.Y.S.2d 912, 386 N.E.2d 823; Swartz v. Karlan, 107 A.D.2d 801, 804, 484 N.Y.S.2d 635; see also, Manno v. Levi, 94 A.D.2d 556, 560, 465 N.Y.S.2......