Tannenbaum v. City of New York, New York City Rapid Transit System
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum Per Curiam.
The acknowledged but unverified notice of claim served herein did not constitute compliance with section 394a-1.0 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York (L. 1937, ch. 929). (Cf. Matter of Bristol v. Buck, 201 App. Div. 100, affd. 234 N. Y. 504; Matter of Passero & Sons, Inc., 237 App. Div. 638; Geelan v. St. Patrick’s Church of West Neck, 179 Misc. 432.) The Comptroller’s acceptance and retention of plaintiff’s affidavit in lieu of an examination did not effect a waiver on the part of the City of compliance with the statute. (Lewis v. City of New York, 278 N.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re James Passero & Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Bristol v. BuckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Matter of Bristol v. . BuckNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Lewis v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
- Schlicher v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tannenbaum v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945