Matter of Lauray v City of New York
2009 NY Slip Op 03676 [62 AD3d 467]
May 7, 2009
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, July 1, 2009


In the Matter of Barbara Lauray, Respondent,
v
City ofNew York et al., Appellants.

[*1]Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Karen M. Griffin of counsel),for appellants.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered January 28, 2008,which granted the petition for leave to file a late notice of claim and deemed the notice of claimtimely filed nunc pro tunc, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the petitiondenied.

As petitioner's counsel concedes, there is no viable cause of action against defendants. Thelocation of petitioner's alleged trip and fall on the sidewalk was in front of a commercial businessand not in front of a one-, two-, or three-family residence (see Administrative Code ofCity of NY § 7-210 [c]). The record further shows that leave to file a late notice of claimwas improperly granted. Petitioner failed to meet her burden of demonstrating a reasonableexcuse for the delay, the timely receipt by respondents of actual notice of the defect, and the lackof prejudice (see e.g. Ocasio v NewYork City Health & Hosps. Corp. [Morrisania Neighborhood Family Care Ctr.], 14 AD3d361 [2005]; General Municipal Law § 50-e [5]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P.,Sweeny, Nardelli, Freedman and Richter, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.