IN RE: Cheryl L. BAUTISTA (2024)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alison Y. Tuitt, J.), entered February 7, 2023, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied petitioner's petition for leave to amend the notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50–e(6), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this personal injury action arising from petitioner's alleged slip and fall on the stairs of a building located at the Castle Hill complex in the Bronx, petitioner's original notice of claim listed the wrong address as the site of the accident.  The court properly denied the petition because petitioner's failure to promptly move to amend the notice of claim prejudiced the ability of respondent New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to investigate the incident while the surrounding facts were still fresh (see Rivera v. New York City Hous. Auth., 160 A.D.3d 564, 564, 75 N.Y.S.3d 167 [1st Dept. 2018]).  Petitioner provides no explanation as to why she failed to properly file and serve her petition until 10 months after NYCHA responded to her notice of claim with a letter stating that it did not own, manage, maintain, or control the property described in the notice of claim (see Rivera v. New York City Hous. Auth., 235 A.D.2d 296, 296, 652 N.Y.S.2d 287 [1st Dept. 1997]).  The unauthenticated photographs petitioner attached to the notice of claim did not depict anything that would alert NYCHA to the correct location (cf.  Brown v. City of New York, 95 N.Y.2d 389, 392, 718 N.Y.S.2d 4, 740 N.E.2d 1078 [2000] [photographs attached to the notice of claim were captioned with location and descriptions of defective sidewalk and curb]).