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.
Denise Miller, respondent, v. City of New York, et al., appellants, et al., defendant.
Argued—September 26, 2014
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants City of New York, New York City Department of Transportation, and New York City Bureau of Sewer Environmental Control Board of the City of New York appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Fusco, J.), dated May 10, 2013, which denied their motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them for failure to comply with General Municipal Law § 50–e, and ordered the plaintiff to file an amended notice of claim.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
On September 5, 2008, the plaintiff allegedly was injured when the vehicle she was driving on a road in Staten Island struck a raised sewer cap. While the plaintiff's notice of claim, complaint, and bill of particulars alleged that the accident occurred on Narrows Road North at the intersection of Targee Street, an amended bill of particulars alleged that the accident occurred on Narrows Road North between Rhine Avenue and Targee Street. The Supreme Court denied the motion of the defendants City of New York, New York City Department of Transportation, and New York City Bureau of Sewer Environmental Control Board of the City of New York (hereinafter collectively the appellants) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the notice of claim did not accurately describe the location of the accident.
The appellants failed to establish that they were prejudiced by any inaccuracy in the description of the location of the accident in the notice of claim (see Robles v. New York City Hous. Auth., 23 NY3d 982, 983). Pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50–e(6), the Supreme Court had the discretion to allow the plaintiff to correct a mistake or supply an omission in the notice of claim at any time, and at any stage of the action.
ENG, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY and BARROS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2013–05480 (Index No. 102449 /09)
Decided: November 05, 2014
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)