Islam v City of New York

Islam v City of New York 2013 NY Slip Op 07564 Decided on November 14, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 14, 2013
Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Freedman, Richter, Feinman, JJ.
11064 107749/10

[*1]Parvin A. Islam, Petitioner-Appellant,

v

The City of New York, Respondent-Respondent.




Law Office of Stuart N. Babich, P.C., Jackson Heights (David
Stein of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Fay NG
of counsel), for respondent.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered July 5, 2012, which denied petitioner's motion to renew his motion for leave to file a late notice of claim, granted respondent's cross motion to dismiss the proceeding, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly held that it lacked the discretion to deem the late notice of claim timely filed because the statute of limitations for petitioner's negligence claim had already expired (General Municipal Law § 50-e[5]; Pierson v City of New York, 56 NY2d 950, 954-955 [1982]; Harper v City of New York, 92 AD3d 505 [1st Dept 2012]).

Petitioner's arguments that the original notice of claim was timely and properly served are unpreserved since they were not raised before the motion court (see Shaw v Silver, 95 AD3d 416, 417 [1st Dept 2012]).

We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them either unpreserved or unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: NOVEMBER 14, 2013

CLERK