Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006

Carpenter v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 20, 2006

30 A.D.3d 594; 817 N.Y.S.2d 155

Cases that cite this one

35 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

Covert v. Westchester County (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County 2024)
Covert v. Westchester County (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County 2024)
Werner v. Nyack Union Free School District (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Friedman v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2025)
Matter of Sollecito v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2025)
Hannon v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2025)
Martell v. City of New York (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
Charlemagne v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
Ky Tong Tang v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
Matter of Rios v. County of Nassau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
Humsted v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Reinemann v. Village of Altamont (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Reinemann v. Village of Altamont (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Casale v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Alvarez v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Anderson v. Town of Oyster Bay (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Anderson v. Town of Oyster Bay (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Cali v. City of Poughkeepsie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Singh v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Moore v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Indar v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Grant v. Nassau County Industrial Development Agency (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Peterson v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Hill v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)

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

*595In a proceeding for leave to serve a late notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Mega, J.), dated March 4, 2005, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim. First, contrary to the Supreme Court’s finding, the appellant, New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter the Housing Authority), did not have actual notice of the claim. The petitioner alleged that a neighbor informed an agent of the Housing Authority that the petitioner had slipped on ice in a parking lot. Even if true, that information was not sufficient to give the Housing Authority “actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim” (General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]). The statute contemplates not only knowledge of the facts, but also how they relate to the legal claim to be asserted (see Williams v Nassau County Med. Ctr., 6 NY3d 531, 537 [2006] [“(w)here, as here, there is little to suggest injury attributable to malpractice during delivery, comprehending or recording the facts surrounding the delivery cannot equate to knowledge of facts underlying a claim”]; Matter of Henriques v City of New York, 22 AD3d 847, 848 [2005]; Matter of Sica v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 226 AD2d 542, 543 [1996]; Matter of Guiliano v Town of Oyster Bay, 244 AD2d 408, 409 [1997]; Matter of Shapiro v County of Nassau, 208 AD2d 545 [1994]). Knowledge that the petitioner fell on ice in the parking lot does not connect the accident to the claim of negligence (see Matter of DiBella v City of New York, 234 AD2d 366 [1996]; Matter of Shapiro v County of Nassau, supra).

Additionally, as the Supreme Court found, the petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her delay (see Matter of Welch v New York City Hous. Auth., 7 AD3d 805 [2004]). Even assuming that the petitioner was incapacitated for a portion of the time during which the 90 days to serve a notice of claim were running, she has not demonstrated that she was unable to serve a notice of claim within the available time (see Matter of Welch v New York City Hous. Auth., supra at 806).

We find it unnecessary to reach the issue of prejudice, because *596even if there were none it still would have been an improvident exercise of discretion for the Supreme Court to grant the petition in view of the Housing Authority’s “[lack of] actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim” (General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]), and the lack of a reasonable excuse for petitioner’s failure to provide timely notice. Crane, J.E, Spolzino, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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