Legal Opinion
Ordillas v. MTA New York City Transit
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 10, 2008PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered October 23, 2006, which denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a late notice of claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff’s proffered excuse of law office failure does not adequately excuse the year-long delay in filing a notice of claim (see Seif v City of New York, 218 AD2d 595 [1995]). She does not *392contend that defendant had actual knowledge of the facts and circumstances constituting her claim within the statutorily prescribed 90-day filing period or within a reasonable time thereafter (see General…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Seif v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Lefkowitz v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Quinn v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Tavarez v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
3Cited by4 opinions
- Santiago v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- McClatchie v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Matter of Smiley v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- McClatchie v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013