IN RE: Ky Tong TANG et al. (2026)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard A. Tsai, J.), entered December 10, 2024, which granted petitioners’ motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon respondent New York City Transit Authority, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion in granting petitioners’ motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim where they moved for leave 27 days after the 90–day deadline (see Matter of Sproule v. New York Convention Ctr. Operating Corp., 180 A.D.3d 496, 497, 120 N.Y.S.3d 5 [1st Dept. 2020];  Matter of Richardson v. New York City Hous. Auth., 136 A.D.3d 484, 485, 24 N.Y.S.3d 308 [1st Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 905, 2016 WL 6209312 [2016]).  The delay was reasonable, particularly in light of the type of accident, namely, a traffic accident between two buses that a New York City police officer investigated (see Matter of Mejia v. New York City Tr. Auth., 224 A.D.3d 546, 206 N.Y.S.3d 33 [1st Dept. 2024], lv denied 42 N.Y.3d 1029, 223 N.Y.S.3d 1, 248 N.E.3d 161 [2024]).  Further, petitioners’ excuse, a mistaken reliance on the police report in determining who operated the municipal bus route, was not unreasonable (see generally Matter of Sokolowski v. New York City Hous. Auth., 173 A.D.2d 239, 239, 569 N.Y.S.2d 448 [1st Dept. 1991]).