Stowe v. City of Elmira
| Decision Date | 29 November 1972 |
| Citation | 31 N.Y.2d 814,291 N.E.2d 586,339 N.Y.S.2d 463 |
| Parties | , 291 N.E.2d 586 Claim of Jackie H. STOWE, Appellant, v. CITY OF ELMIRA, New York, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Donovan, Graner, Davidson & Burns, Elmira (D. Bruce Crew, III, Elmira, of counsel), for defendants-respondents.
Proceeding on application for leave to file delayed notice of claim against City. The Supreme Court, Chemung County, Special Term, granted leave and the City appealed.
The Appellate Division reversed the order and denied the motion. It held that the showing that a near adult received a letter from his attorney before the expiration of period for service of notice of claim asking contact at the earliest convenience but that the matter slipped his mind since he had company and went fishing was insufficient to invoke discretionary power to enlarge period on ground of infancy, since there is no showing of relationship between infancy and failure to file claim. The prospective claimant appealed.
Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: The Court of Appeals will not review the Appellate Division's exercise of sound discretion to grant or deny an application to file a late notice of claim under section 50--e of the General Municipal Law, Consol. Laws, c. 24, (see Matter of Murray v. City of New York, 30 N.Y.2d 113, 331 N.Y.S.2d 9, 282 N.E.2d 103; Matter of Biberias v. New York City Tr. Auth., 27 N.Y.2d 890, 317 N.Y.S.2d 365, 265 N.E.2d 775).
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dusch v. Erie Cnty. Med. Ctr.
...Matter of Kressner v. Town of Malta , 169 A.D.2d 927, 928, 564 N.Y.S.2d 643 [3d Dept. 1991] ; see Matter of Stowe v. City of Elmira , 31 N.Y.2d 814, 815, 339 N.Y.S.2d 463, 291 N.E.2d 586 [1972] ; Rechenberger v. Nassau County Med. Ctr. , 112 A.D.2d 150, 153, 490 N.Y.S.2d 838 [2d Dept. 1985]......
-
Crume v. Clarence Central School Dist. No. 1
...be imperiled. Thus, the ultimate discretion in these cases must be exercised by the Appellate Division (Matter of Stowe v. City of Elmira, 31 N.Y.2d 814, 339 N.Y.S.2d 463, 291 N.E.2d 586; Matter of Murray v. City of New York, supra; Matter of Biberias v. New York City Transit Authority, 27 ......
-
Arnold v. Town of Camillus
... ... Court of Appeals' decision in Margerum v City of ... Buffalo (24 N.Y.3d 721 [2015]), which adhered to the ... interpretations of Departments of ... Division]'" (Dusch, 184 A.D.3d at 1169; ... see Matter of Stowe v City of Elmira, 31 N.Y.2d 814, ... 815 [1972]; Matter of Kressner v Town of Malta, 169 ... ...
-
Febles v. City of New York
...entered. Indeed, the ultimate discretion in these cases must be exercised by the Appellate Division (Matter of Stowe v. City of Elmira, 31 N.Y.2d 814, 339 N.Y.S.2d 463, 291 N.E.2d 586; Matter of Murray v. City of New York, Supra; Matter of Biberias v. New York City Transit Authority, 27 N.Y......