Majority
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiffs failure to include a proposed notice of claim with the papers in support of her cross motion was a sufficient basis for denying her cross motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim (see General Municipal Law § 50-e [7]; Matter of Scott v Huntington Union Free School Dist., 29 AD3d 1010 , 1010 [2006]). Moreover, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate grounds for granting leave to serve a late notice of claim (see Rowe v Nassau Health Care Corp., 57 AD3d 961 , 963 [2008]; Williams v Nassau County Med. Ctr., 13 AD3d 363 , 364 [2004], affd 6 NY3d 531 [2006]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to serve a timely notice of claim pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e, and properly denied the plaintiffs cross motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim.
Dillon, J.E, Hall, Austin and Barros, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Scott v. Huntington Union Free School District 29 AD3d 1010 at 1010 p. 823
- Rowe v. Nassau Health Care Corp. 57 AD3d 961 at 963 p. 823
- Williams v. Nassau County Medical Center 13 AD3d 363 at 364 p. 823
- Williams v. Nassau County Medical Center 6 NY3d 531 p. 823