Although apparently unknown to petitioner, a notice of claim was timely served by attorneys he had apparently discharged, rendering the instant application moot. We note that the application was filed after the statute of limitations had run, rendering it time-barred as well (see Pierson 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.
MIDDLETON v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
28 A.D.3d 366 (2006)
812 N.Y.S.2d 357
ISAAC MIDDLETON, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
April 20, 2006.
April 20, 2006.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.