Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the defendant was estopped from asserting a notice of claim defense as a matter of law ( see Conquest Cleaning Corp. v New York City School Constr. Auth., 279 AD2d 546).
Additionally, the Supreme Court properly determined, in effect, that based upon the undisputed facts the defendant was equitably estopped from asserting the statute of limitations defense ( see Zumpano v Quinn, 6 NY3d 666, 675; Gleason v Spota, 194 AD2d 764, 765).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.