AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

JANKIE CHATTERGOON, as Administrator of the Estate of RAMPATTI CHATTERGOON, Deceased, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellant.

We disagree with respondent that there was undue delay in petitioner's waiting to seek renewal while the prior appeal ( 161 A.D.2d 141, affd 78 N.Y.2d 958) was sub judice before the Court of Appeals. Petitioner set forth new factual material, as opposed to legal argument, in detailing the physical evidence in respondent's possession concerning the claim of failed security, and the interviews it conducted concerning lock maintenance (cf., Haussmann v. Wolf, 187 A.D.2d 371, 373; Matter of Disston Co. [Aktiebolag], 187 A.D.2d 283, lv dismissed 81 N.Y.2d 835). Having properly granted renewal, the IAS Court then properly exercised its discretion in granting leave to serve the late notice pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) with respect to the claim for conscious pain and suffering. Respondent's police file sufficiently indicates that the investigation into the death of petitioner's decedent, while it undoubtedly focused primarily on solving the homicide, also paid close attention, through preservation of physical evidence and interviews with building personnel, to the condition of the apartment locks and their maintenance, providing respondent with actual knowledge of the underlying facts that form the basis for petitioner's claim (see, Matter of Olmo v. City of New York, 178 A.D.2d 197, 198, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 755; cf., Bullard v. City of New York, 118 A.D.2d 447, 450-451 [Kassal, J., concurring]). In determining whether to permit the filing of a late notice of claim "the presence or absence of any one factor is not determinative" (Matter of Morris v. County of Suffolk, 88 A.D.2d 956, 957, affd 58 N.Y.2d 767), and the absence of a reasonable excuse for the delay is not fatal (see, Matter of Gerzel v. City of New York, 117 A.D.2d 549, 551; Rechenberger v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., 112 A.D.2d 150, 152-153). Given respondent's knowledge, and the resulting lack of prejudice, petitioner's unexplained delay in seeking leave to serve a late notice is of minimal significance.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Kassal, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CHATTERGOON v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTH
(Oct 12, 1993)