Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011

Santana v. New York City Transit Authoriy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 18, 2011

88 A.D.3d 539; 930 N.Y.2d 587

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Donaldson v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Buren v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)

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

The court should not have granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend the notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (6). Flaintiffs did not merely seek to supplement the original claim, but rather, impermissibly sought to change the theory of liability from a fall on the stairs due to snow, ice or slush to a fall due to a loose metal tread (see Torres v New York City Hous. Auth., 261 AD2d 273, 275 [1999], lv denied 93 NY2d *540816 [1999]). Moreover, defendant would be prejudiced by the amendment since the original notice of claim was insufficient to allow them to effectively conduct a meaningful investigation of plaintiffs’ amended claim (see id. at 274-275).

In view of the foregoing, we need not reach the merits of plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a late notice of claim. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.E, Moskowitz, Acosta, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.

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