DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The new theories of recovery contained in the plaintiff's proposed amended notice of claim would have substantially altered the nature of her claims. Amendments of a substantive nature are not within the purview of General Municipal Law § 50-e(6) ( see Richard v. Town of Oyster Bay, 300 A.D.2d 561; White v. New York City Hous. Auth., 288 A.D.2d 150).
The plaintiff's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review.
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.