Majority
—In a personal injury action, the defendant Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaccaro, J.), dated August 13, 1992, which granted the plaintiffs application for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the defendant.
Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and the application is denied.
When a plaintiff is seeking leave to serve a late notice of claim, the court must consider whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a reasonable excuse for his or her failure to serve a timely notice of claim, whether the entity to be served acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within the time which one must serve a notice of claim or within a reasonable time thereafter, and whether the delay would substantially prejudice the entity in maintaining its defense on the merits (see, Carbone v Town of Brookhaven, 176 AD2d 778 ; Pagan v New York City Hous. Auth., 175 AD2d 114 ; Pavone v City of New York, 170 AD2d 493 ).
Here, the plaintiff was allegedly injured in a fall on May 21, 1991, from the Marine Parkway Bridge. However, the plaintiff did not make the appropriate motion to serve a late notice of claim until April 15, 1992. Moreover, the plaintiff claims the defendant acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts when its employee, a Marine Parkway Bridge operator, re
Cases cited
- Carbone v. Town of Brookhaven 176 AD2d 778 p. 330
- Pagan v. New York City Housing Authority 175 AD2d 114 p. 330
- Pavone v. City of New York 170 AD2d 493 p. 330
- Caselli v. City of New York 105 AD2d 251 p. 331
- Tarquinio v. City of New York 84 AD2d 265 p. 331
- Pierson v. City of New York 56 NY2d 950 p. 331