Legal Opinion
Munroe v. Booth
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 5, 1953PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Per curiam
A reversal would be justified in this ease only if the court were to ignore the plain command of the applicable statutes that the essential notice of claim must be served upon a “ member of the board of education, * * * [a] trustee, or the clerk thereof ” (Civ. Prac. Act, § 228, subd. 6; General Municipal Law, § 50-e). Concededly, there was a complete failure to obey or comply with that mandate.
Mrs. Hardy, with whom the paper was left, was neither a member of the board of education nor “ the clerk ” of that board. And since, even on her own say-so, she had received only ‘ ‘ about three ’ ’…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Teresta v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
3Cited by29 opinions
- Parochial Bus Systems, Inc. v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Scantlebury v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2005
- P. J. Panzeca, Inc. v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Franz v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Estate of McElwee v. Omaha Transit AuthorityNebraska Supreme Court · 2003
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.