McLeod v. City of N.Y.
| Decision Date | 03 April 2013 |
| Citation | 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 02251,105 A.D.3d 744,962 N.Y.S.2d 641 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Adriane McLEOD, etc., respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmersand Kaye Scholer [Sheila S. Boston and Kawezya Burris], of counsel), for appellants.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SANDRA L. SGROI, and SYLVIA HINDS–RADIX, JJ.
In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50–e(5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the City of New York and the New York City Department of Education appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ash, J.), dated February 1, 2012, which granted the petition.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner's infant son allegedly was injured inside the gymnasium of a middle school in Brooklyn while playing tackle football without any safety equipment. The Supreme Court granted the petition for leave to serve the City of New York and the New York City Department of Education (hereinafter together the City defendants) with a late notice of claim.
In determining whether to grant leave to serve a late notice of claim, the court must consider whether (1) the public corporation acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days after the claim arose or a reasonable time thereafter, (2) the claimant was an infant at the time the claim arose and, if so, whether there was a nexus between the claimant's infancy and the delay, (3) the claimant had a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve a timely notice of claim and the subsequent delay in seeking leave to serve a notice of claim, and (4) the public corporation was prejudiced by the delay in its ability to maintain its defense on the merits ( seeEducation Law § 3813[2–a]; General Municipal Law § 50–e[5]; Williams v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., 6 N.Y.3d 531, 535, 814 N.Y.S.2d 580, 847 N.E.2d 1154;Bazile v. City of New York, 94 A.D.3d 929, 929–930, 943 N.Y.S.2d 131;Matter of Diggs v. Board of Educ. of City of Yonkers, 79 A.D.3d 869, 869–870, 912 N.Y.S.2d 688).
Here, the City defendants acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days after the claim arose, as indicated by an affidavit from the petitioner, wherein she stated that immediately following her son's injury, a teacher's aide took her...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ramirez v. City of N.Y.
...of prejudice (see Matter of Viola v. Ronkonkoma Middle Sch., 107 A.D.3d at 1010, 968 N.Y.S.2d 876 ; Matter of McLeod v. City of New York, 105 A.D.3d 744, 746, 962 N.Y.S.2d 641 ). However, the Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the petition which was for leave to file a late noti......
-
Messick v. Greenwood Lake Union Free Sch. Dist.
...of prejudice (see Matter of Viola v. Ronkonkoma Middle Sch., 107 A.D.3d at 1010, 968 N.Y.S.2d 876 ; Matter of McLeod v. City of New York, 105 A.D.3d 744, 746, 962 N.Y.S.2d 641 ).Accordingly, the petition should have been granted. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., DILLON, COHEN and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., ...
-
Sparrow v. Hewlett-Woodmere Union Free Sch. Dist.
...Law § 50–e[5]; Williams v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., 6 N.Y.3d 531, 538, 814 N.Y.S.2d 580, 847 N.E.2d 1154;Matter of McLeod v. City of New York, 105 A.D.3d 744, 745, 962 N.Y.S.2d 641;Bazile v. City of New York, 94 A.D.3d 929, 943 N.Y.S.2d 131;Matter of Felice v. Eastport/South Manor Cent. Sch......
-
Fennell v. City Sch. Dist. of City of Long Beach
...1010, 968 N.Y.S.2d 876;Matter of Rodriguez v. Woodhull Sch., 105 A.D.3d at 1051, 963 N.Y.S.2d 724;Matter of McLeod v. City of New York, 105 A.D.3d 744, 746, 962 N.Y.S.2d 641). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim or to deem a......