Legal Opinion

Hernandez v. New York City Transit Authority

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1963PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBirdie Amsterdam, J.

The accident occurred on February 27, 1960, the notice of claim was served on May 12, 1960, defendant’s demand for examination of plaintiff was served June 3, 1960 and held on December 8, 1960. The action was commenced on May 31, 1961, which was one year, and 93 days after the occurrence.

Defendant argues that the action is time-barred, having been commenced more than 1 year and 30 days after the occurrence (Public Authorities Law, § 1212, subds. 1, 2, 4; Civ. Prac. Act. § 24; Matter of Forastad v. New York City Tr. Auth., 13 A D 2d 836; Heeren v. New York City Tr. Auth., 231 N. Y. S. 2d 993).

P…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Cespedes v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  2. Pilgrim v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. Herrera v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  4. All-State Auto Rental Corp. v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityCivil Court of the City of New York · 1968
  5. Barchet v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API