Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002

McDaniel v. City of Buffalo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided February 1, 2002

291 A.D.2d 826; 737 N.Y.S.2d 904; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 995

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Fang v. Town of Amherst (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
Kluczynski v. Zwack (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
GRAVIUS, DEBORAH I. v. COUNTY OF ERIE (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Gravius v. County of Erie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Landa v. Poloncarz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Jeffrey T.C. v. Grand Is. Cent. Sch. Dist. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Legal Services for Elderly, Disabled, or Disadvantaged v. County of Erie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Legal Services for Elderly, Disabled, or Disadvantaged v. County of Erie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
First Church in Albany of Reformed Church in America v. State (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2002)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Glownia, J.), entered March 20, 2001, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion seeking dismissal of the complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed.

Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion seeking dismissal of the complaint based on plaintiffs repeated failure to appear at the hearings scheduled pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h (1). It is well settled that a plaintiff who has not complied with General Municipal Law § 50-h (1) is precluded from maintaining an action against a municipality (see, Patterson v Ford, 255 AD2d 373; Secor v Town of Orangetown, 250 AD2d 588, 589). Although compliance with General Municipal Law § 50-h (1) may be excused in “exceptional circumstances” (Arcila v Incorporated Vil. of Freeport, 231 AD2d 660, 661), here plaintiff offered no excuse for his repeated failure to appear at the scheduled hearings. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Wisner, Burns and Lawton, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.