Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012

Bell v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided November 28, 2012

100 A.D.3d 990; 954 N.Y.S.2d 229

Cases that cite this one

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

Ramirez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Luna v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Sanchez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Sanchez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Snyder v. County of Suffolk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Snyder v. County of Suffolk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Destine v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Destine v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Hannon v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2025)
Williams v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
Williams v. New York City Tr. Auth. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
Umeh v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Umeh v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Matter of Gabriel v. City of Long Beach (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Matter of Romero v. County of Suffolk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Matter of C. N. v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Matter of Harding v. Yonkers Cent. Sch. Dist. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
Matter of Brown v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
Matter of Moroz v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Matter of Bermudez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Matter of Fethallah v. New York City Police Dept. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Matter of Ronness v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Matter of Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Suffolk County Police Dept. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Daprile v. Town of Copake (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Matter of Unique Wooden v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)

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

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the City of New York appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ash, J.), dated August 12, 2011, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the petition is denied.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim. The petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve a timely notice of claim and for the delay in filing the petition (see Matter of Dube v City of New York, 158 AD2d 457 [1990]). The petitioner’s ignorance of the law and late retention of counsel did not constitute reasonable excuses (see Matter of Taylor v County of Suffolk, 90 AD3d 769, 770 [2011]; Matter of Wright v City of New York, 66 AD3d 1037, 1038 [2009]; Matter of Ealey v City of New York, 204 AD2d 720 [1994]). Furthermore, the petitioner failed to submit any medical evidence to support his assertion that he was incapacitated *991to such an extent that he could not have complied with the statutory requirement to serve a timely notice of claim (see Matter of Taylor v County of Suffolk, 90 AD3d at 770; Matter of Wright v City of New York, 66 AD3d at 1038; Matter of Portnov v City of Glen Cove, 50 AD3d 1041 [2008]; Matter of Papayannakos v Levittown Mem. Special Educ. Ctr., 38 AD3d 902 [2007]).

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the City did not acquire actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days after the accident or a reasonable time thereafter. The defect indicated on a map filed with the New York City Department of Transportation by the Big Apple Pothole and Sidewalk Protection Corporation more than nine years before the accident did not suffice to give the City actual knowledge of the essential facts underlying the petitioner’s present claim or his theory of liability against the City (see Matter of Khalid v City of New York, 91 AD3d 779, 780 [2012]; Matter of Konstantinides v City of New York, 278 AD2d 235 [2000]; Matter of Rios v City of New York, 180 AD2d 801, 802 [1992]). In addition, the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his delay of more than four months in commencing this proceeding would not substantially prejudice the City in maintaining its defense, given the transitory nature of the sidewalk defect (see Matter of Valentine v City of New York, 72 AD3d 981, 982 [2010]; Matter of Felice v Eastport/South Manor Cent. School Dist., 50 AD3d 138, 153 [2008]; Matter of Papayannakos v Levittown Mem. Special Educ. Ctr., 38 AD3d at 903; Matter of Gofman v City of New York, 268 AD2d 588 [2000]).

The petitioner improperly asserted an additional excuse for the delay for the first time in a reply affidavit and, therefore, that excuse could not properly be considered (see Matter of Wright v City of New York, 99 AD3d 717 [2012]; Matter of Cali v City of Poughkeepsie, 84 AD3d 1229 [2011]; Fenner v County of Nassau, 80 AD3d 555, 556 [2011]). Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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