Harris v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The motion court properly exercised its discretion in denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a notice of claim some four weeks after expiration of the applicable 90-day deadline (General Municipal Law § 50-e [1] [a]). Although a causal nexus between infancy and late filing need no longer be shown (Ali v Bunny Realty Corp., 253 AD2d 356, 357), plaintiffs acknowledge on this appeal that neither infancy alone (see, Matter of Bagnasco v Suffolk County Water Auth., 272 AD2d 611; Rogers v City of Yonkers, 271 AD2d 593) nor ignorance of the law (Matter of Embery v City of New York, 250 AD2d…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Henry v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Strauss v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Weiss v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Harris v. Dormitory AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Ferrer v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Mieux v. Alden High SchoolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Ansong v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Gaston v. New York City Department of Health Office of Chief Medical ExaminerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Mehra v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Bayo v. Burnside Mews AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.