Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The granting of that branch of the application which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the appellant (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e) did not constitute an improvident exercise of discretion in this case. In determining such an application, the court must consider all of the relevant statutory factors (Fahey v County of Nassau, 111 A.D.2d 214, 216; Matter of Savelli v City of New York, 104 A.D.2d 943, 945; Matter of Cicio v City of New York, 98 A.D.2d 38, 39), and the presence or absence of any one of those factors is not necessarily determinative (Fahey v County of Nassau, supra, at 216; Matter of Morris v County of Suffolk, 88 A.D.2d 956, 957, affd 58 N.Y.2d 767). Here, the claimant made an adequate showing that his physical incapacity precluded him from timely serving a notice of claim (Matter of Savelli v City of New York, supra, at 944). Moreover, the appellant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice. Bracken, J.P., Rubin, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.