Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Ann POWER, respondent, v. MANHATTAN AND BRONX SURFACE OPERATING AUTHORITY, et al., appellants.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Minardo, J.), dated March 8, 2004, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint for failure to set forth the correct time of the accident in the notice of claim.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
General Municipal Law § 50-e(6) provides that a “mistake, omission, irregularity or defect” in the notice of claim “may be corrected, supplied or disregarded” in the court's discretion, provided that such mistake, omission, irregularity, or defect was made in good faith, in the absence of any prejudice to the municipal defendant (see D'Alessandro v. New York City Tr. Auth., 83 N.Y.2d 891, 893, 613 N.Y.S.2d 849, 636 N.E.2d 1382; Ingle v. New York City Tr. Auth., 7 A.D.3d 574, 575, 777 N.Y.S.2d 154; Miller v. New York City Tr. Auth., 6 A.D.3d 405, 406, 774 N.Y.S.2d 376; Butler v. Town of Smithtown, 293 A.D.2d 696, 697, 742 N.Y.S.2d 324; Neal v. Amityville Union Free School Dist., 288 A.D.2d 450, 451, 733 N.Y.S.2d 245).
In determining the sufficiency of a notice of claim in the context of a motion to dismiss, a court may consider the testimony provided during a hearing pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h, and any other evidence before the court, as well as the notice of claim (see D'Alessandro v. New York City Tr. Auth, supra at 893, 613 N.Y.S.2d 849, 636 N.E.2d 1382).
Although the plaintiff provided the defendants with the wrong time of the accident in her notice of claim, she corrected such error at her General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing. Further, the plaintiff provided the correct date and place of the accident in her notice of claim, as well as the circumstances regarding the accident at her General Municipal Law § 50-h hearing. Therefore, in the absence of any bad faith by the plaintiff and the lack of prejudice to the defendants, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion to dismiss the complaint.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 28, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)