Legal Opinion
Friedman v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 20, 2005PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*543In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Elliot, J.), entered March 17, 2004, which denied her motion, inter alia, for leave to serve a late notice of claim nunc pro tunc pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5), and which granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Service of a notice of claim within 90 days after accrual of the claim was a condition precedent for commencing an action against the defendant, City of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pierson v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Small v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Perry v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Santiago v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
3Cited by16 opinions
- Decoteau v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Pierre v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Shahid v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Browne v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Ellman v. Village of RhinebeckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.