Legal Opinion
Morris v. Doe
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 27, 2013PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Ruder-man, J.), dated November 29, 2011, which denied his motion for leave to file a late claim pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (6).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
“Court of Claims Act § 10 (6) permits a court, in its discretion, upon consideration of certain enumerated factors, to allow a claimant to file a late claim (see Qing Liu v City Univ. of N.Y., 262 AD2d 473 [1999]). No one factor is deemed controlling, nor is the presence or absence of any one factor…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Qing Liu v. City UniversityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Cabral v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Barella v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Broncati v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Jomarron v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
3Cited by12 opinions
- Tucholski v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Borawski v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Hyatt v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Winter v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Buyes v. State of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.