Shane v. Central New York Regional Transportation Authority
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Anthony J. Paris, J.), entered January 25, 2010. The order denied the motion of plaintiff for leave to file and serve a late notice of claim.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is reversed on the law without costs and the application is granted upon condition that the proposed notice of claim is served within 20 days of the date of entry of the order of this Court.
All concur except Garni and Lindley, JJ., who dissent and vote to affirm in the following memorandum.
Dissenting Opinion
(dissenting). We respectfully dissent and therefore would affirm the order denying plaintiffs application for leave to serve a late notice of claim. Supreme Court is “ ‘vested with broad discretion to grant or deny [an] application’ ” for leave to serve a late notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) (Matter of Hall v Madison-Oneida County Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs., 66 AD3d 1434, 1435 [2009]; see Carpenter v NY Adoance Elec., Inc., 77 AD3d 1344, 1345 [2010]) and, absent a clear abuse of discretion, the court’s determination should not be disturbed (see Matter of Schwindt v County of Essex, 60 AD3d 1248, 1249 [2009]; Matter of Hinton v New Paltz Cent. School Dist., 50 AD3d 1414, 1415 [2008]). Here, in our view, the court’s denial of the application does not constitute a clear abuse of discretion.
With respect to her excuse for failing to file a timely notice of claim, plaintiff contends that she did not know that she had sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) until April 2009, when she was out of work as a result of injuries that she allegedly sustained in the accident. The record demonstrates, however, that plaintiff did not file her ap
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.