Opinion · Nylaw New York

GRIFFIN v. TORRES, 284 App. Div. 1041 (1954)

OLIVIA S. GRIFFIN, as Adm’r, Adm’x of the Est. of RONALD GRIFFIN,Deceased, Respondent, v. JOSE TORRES, Defendant, & CITY OF NEW YORK,Appellant., 284 A.D. 1041 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. 1954)

Type
Opinion
Court
Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction
Nylaw
Date
1954-12-21
Topic
general

GRIFFIN v. TORRES, 284 App. Div. 1041 (1954) OLIVIA S. GRIFFIN, as Administratrix of the Estate of RONALD GRIFFIN,Deceased, Respondent, v. JOSE TORRES, Defendant, and CITY OF NEW YORK,Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed GRIFFIN v. TORRES, 284 App. Div. 1041 (1954). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

GRIFFIN v. TORRES,284 App. Div. 1041(1954)
OLIVIA S. GRIFFIN, as Administratrix of the Estate of RONALD GRIFFIN,
Deceased, Respondent, v. JOSE TORRES, Defendant, and CITY OF NEW YORK,
Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
December 21, 1954.
Plaintiff has failed to assert any facts under which the court, pursuant to subdivision 5 of section 50-e Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law, could excuse her failure to serve a notice of claim for the wrongful death of her intestate within the statutory period. (SeeMulliganv.City of New York,273 App. Div. 152,153.) The proposed cause of action for conscious pain and suffering accrued during the lifetime of the intestate, and as to this claim the court in its discretion may grant leave to serve the notice of claim within a reasonable time after the expiration of the time specified in thePage 1042statute. However, the application herein was not made until one day short of a year after the intestate's death and more than ten months after the issuance of limited letters of administration. The explanation offered by plaintiff for her failure to comply with the statute does not meet the requirements necessary to invoke the favorable exercise of the court's discretion. Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion denied.
Present — Peck, P.J., Cohn, Callahan, Breitel and Botein, JJ.