Lachica v. State
| Citation | 476 N.Y.S.2d 182,101 A.D.2d 881 |
| Parties | Ruby D. LACHICA, Respondent, v. The STATE of New York, Appellant, et al., Defendants. |
| Decision Date | 29 May 1984 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., New York City , for appellant.
Charles P. Kelly, New York City, for respondent.
Before GIBBONS, J.P., and O'CONNOR, BOYERS and LAWRENCE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a claim to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant State of New York appeals from an order of the Court of Claims, dated August 5, 1983, which, inter alia, granted claimant's motion insofar as it sought leave to file a late claim against it for breach of contract (see Court of Claims Act, § 10, subd. 6).
Order affirmed, with costs.
Where, as here, the majority of the factors enumerated in subdivision 6 of section 10 of the Court of Claims Act are in favor of claimant, the Court of Claims cannot be said to have abused its discretion by granting the application to file a late claim (see, e.g., Bay Terrace Coop. Section IV v. New York State Employees' Retirement System Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement System, 55 N.Y.2d 979, 449 N.Y.S.2d 185, 434 N.E.2d 254; Matter of Butler v. State of New York, 81 A.D.2d 834, 438 N.Y.S.2d 834).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lachica v. State, 68248
...20, 1983, Orlando, J.). The order on that motion was affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department. (See Lachica v. State of New York, 101 A.D.2d 881, 476 N.Y.S.2d 182). This Court does not agree. It is not unknown that a finding of an "... appearance of merit ..." (Court of Claims ......
-
Prusack v. State
...enumerated in the statute are in favor of claimants, permission to file a late claim is typically granted (see, Lachica v. State of New York, 101 A.D.2d 881, 476 N.Y.S.2d 182; Bay Terrace Coop. Section IV v. New York State Employees' Retirement System, Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement Sys......
-
Calzada v. State
...in this court to grant leave for late filing of his notice of claim (Rios v. State, 67 A.D.2d 744, 412 N.Y.S.2d 227; Lachica v. State, 101 A.D.2d 881, 476 N.Y.S.2d 182), and we therefore reverse and order ...