Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, we find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying his motion for leave to file a late notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e). The plaintiff offered no excuse for his failure to file a timely notice of claim, or for his 14-month delay in making the instant application (see, Perry v City of New York,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.