GASTMAN v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF NEW YORK (2009)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karen S. Smith, J.), entered February 28, 2008, which granted defendant's motion to renew its prior motion to dismiss the complaint and, upon renewal, granted the motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to file a timely notice of claim (Education Law § 3813[1] ).   As the court held, plaintiff's unverified letters and emails to Department of Education personnel, “each addressing different aspects of her complaints,” do not constitute a notice of claim (see Education Law § 3813[1];  Varsity Tr., Inc. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 N.Y.3d 532, 806 N.Y.S.2d 457, 840 N.E.2d 569 [2005];  Parochial Bus Sys., Inc. v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 539, 547, 470 N.Y.S.2d 564, 458 N.E.2d 1241 [1983] ).   In any event, such correspondence was not presented to defendant's governing body within three months after the accrual of plaintiff's discrimination claims as required by the statute (see Pinder v. City of New York, 49 A.D.3d 280, 853 N.Y.S.2d 312 [2008] ).   Plaintiff's application for leave to file a late notice of claim made beyond the one-year statute of limitations must be denied as untimely (see Education Law § 3813[2-b];  Matter of Amorosi v. South Colonie Ind. Cent. School Dist., 9 N.Y.3d 367, 373-374, 849 N.Y.S.2d 485, 880 N.E.2d 6 [2007] ).

We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.