Van Horn v. Village of New Paltz
| Citation | 393 N.Y.S.2d 218,57 A.D.2d 642 |
| Parties | Pearl Lane VAN HORN, as Limited Administratrix of the Estate of Edward Nelson Van Horn, Deceased, Respondent, v. VILLAGE OF NEW PALTZ, New York, et al., Appellants. |
| Decision Date | 07 April 1977 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Carter, Conboy, Bardwell, Case & Blackmore, Albany (William P. Soronen, Jr., Albany, of counsel), for appellant Village of New Paltz.
McCann, Ahern & Sommers, Newburgh (Donald H. McCann, Newburgh, of counsel), for appellants Richard T. Thompson and Charles Richard Walton.
Joseph D. Hill, Kingston, for respondent.
Before KOREMAN, P.J., and GREENBLOTT, SWEENEY, MAIN and HERLIHY, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered June 16 1976, which granted leave to the claimant to file a late notice of claim.
Decedent died on March 27, 1975, allegedly as a result of bullet wounds he sustained the previous day through the negligence and assault of defendant police officers who were in the employ of the defendant Village. On August 6, 1975 claimant, decedent's mother, was issued Limited Letters of Administration. On December 17, 1975, claimant obtained an order to show cause for leave to file a late notice of claim. Claimant contended that the Village of New Paltz refused to give requested information to her or her attorney concerning the circumstances surrounding decedent's death and that this information was necessary in order to file a proper notice of claim. It was also alleged and not denied by defendants that defendant Village refused to release requested information to claimant concerning disciplinary hearings involving defendants Thompson and Walton conducted by the Village Board of Police Commissioners. These hearings held in May, 1975 pertained to the events surrounding decedent's death. Leave to file a late notice of claim was granted by Special Term and this appeal ensued.
Initially, defendants contend that the amendment to section 50--e of the General Municipal Law which became effective September 1, 1976 should not be given retroactive effect (L.1976, ch. 745, § 2). This court has recently decided, however, that this amendment should be given retroactive effect and that a court now has general discretion to extend the time to serve a notice of claim (Nolan v. County of Otsego, 56 A.D.2d 422, 391 N.Y.S.2d 15 (1977)). Thus, even though Special Term granted leave to claimant prior to the effective date of this amendment, this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walach v. State
...1976, and dealing with applications for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon municipal corporations. See, Van Horn v. Village of New Paltz, 57 A.D.2d 642, 393 N.Y.S.2d 218 (Third Dept., 1977); Nolan v. County of Otsego, 55 A.D.2d 422, 391 N.Y.S.2d 15 (Third Dept., 1977); Rippe v. City......
-
Pauletti v. Freeport Union Free School Dist. No. 9
...50-e, deeming the statute "remedial" or "procedural" (Nolan v. County of Otsego, 55 A.D.2d 422, 391 N.Y.S.2d 15; Van Horn v. Village of New Paltz, App.Div.2d, 393 N.Y.S.2d 218; Matter of Smalls v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 55 A.D.2d 537, 389 N.Y.S.2d 372; Rippe v. City of Rochest......
-
Waiters v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.
...69 A.D.2d 991, 416 N.Y.S.2d 126; Matter of Wemett v. County of Onondaga, 64 A.D.2d 1025, 409 N.Y.S.2d 312; Van Horn v. Village of New Paltz, 57 A.D.2d 642, 393 N.Y.S.2d 218; Rippe v. City of Rochester, 57 A.D.2d 723, 395 N.Y.S.2d ...
-
Westchester County v. Edo Corp.
...the plaintiff had knowledge of the event and the delay has not caused the plaintiff any disadvantage (see Van Horn v. Village of New Paltz, 57 A.D.2d 642, 393 N.Y.S.2d 218; Matter of Ziecker v. Town of Orchard Park, 70 A.D.2d 422, 421 N.Y.S.2d 447, affd. 51 N.Y.2d 957, 435 N.Y.S.2d 720, 416......