Rivera-Guallpa v. Cnty. of Nassau, 40 A.D.3d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). · Go Syfert
Search
Rivera-Guallpa v. Cnty. of Nassau, 40 A.D.3d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Benjamin v. Nassau Health Care Corp. (nyappdiv, 2016-04-20)
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Benjamin v. Nassau Health Care Corp.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Under those circumstances, the fact that the petitioner could not show a reasonable excuse for the delay does not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the appellant (see Matter of Joy v County of Suffolk, 89 AD3d 1025, 1027 [2011]; Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Matter of Corvera v Nassau County Health Care Corp., 38 AD3d 775, 776-777 [2007]; Matter of Tapia v New York City Health & Hosps.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kellman v. Hauppauge Union Free School District
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
The absence of a reasonable excuse for the infant plaintiffs delay does not bar the court from granting leave to serve a late notice of claim, since here, there is actual notice and an absence of prejudice (see Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d at 720 ; Montero v New York City Health & Hosps.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) St. Paul Guardian Insurance Corporation v. Pocatello Fire District
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
Finally, the absence of a reasonable excuse for the delay does not bar the granting of the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim where, as here, there is actual knowledge and an absence of prejudice (see Matter of Whittaker v New York City Bd. of Educ., 71 AD3d 776, 778 [2010]; Matter of Leeds v Port Washington Union Free School Dist., 55 AD3d 734, 735 [2008]; Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Joy v. County of Suffolk
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
While the petitioner’s excuse for her failure to serve a timely notice of claim is not reasonable (see Matter of Baglivi v Town of Southold, 301 AD2d 597, 598 [2003]), where there is actual notice and absence of prejudice, the lack of a reasonable excuse will not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim (see Matter of Brownstein v Incorporated Vil. of Hempstead, 52 AD3d 507, 510 [2008]; Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d at 720 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mounsey v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
Finally, as there was actual notice and an absence of prejudice, the lack of a reasonable excuse does not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the appellant (see Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Montero v New York City Health & Hosps.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Erichson v. City of Poughkeepsie Police Department
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
Finally, where there is actual notice and an absence of prejudice, the lack of a reasonable excuse will not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim (see Brownstein v Incorporated Vil. of Hempstead, 52 AD3d at 510 ; Matter of Rivera Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d at 720 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Paige Leeds v. Port Washington Union Free School District
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
The absence of a reasonable excuse for the delay does not bar the court from granting leave to serve a late notice of claim, since here, there is actual notice and an absence of prejudice (see Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d 717, 720 [2005]; Montero v New York City Health & Hosps.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brownstein v. Incorporated Village of Hempstead
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
While the petitioners conceded that they had no reasonable excuse for their failure to timely serve a notice of claim within the 90-day period, where there is actual notice and an absence of prejudice, the lack of a reasonable excuse will not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim (see Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d at 720 ; Montero v New York City Health & Hosps.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Catterson v. Suffolk County Department of Health Services
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
In any event, the absence of a reasonable excuse for the delay does not bar the court from granting leave to serve a late notice of claim under the extant circumstances (see Matter of Rivera-Guallpa v County of Nassau, 40 AD3d 1001, 1002 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 816 [2007]; Matter of Vasquez v City of Newburgh, 35 AD3d 621, 623-624 [2006]; Gibbs v City of New York, 22 AD3d at 720 ).
discussed Cited "see" Tyk v. Surat (2×)
2d Cir. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Rivera-Guallpa v. Cty. of Nassau, 40 A.D.3d 1001, 1002 , 836 N.Y.S.2d 288 (2007) (applying the prejudice and actual notice review only after the plaintiff requested leave to file a late notice of claim).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Denis Vicente Rivera-Guallpa
v.
County of Nassau, and Nassau Health Care Corporation
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
May 22, 2007.
40 A.D.3d 1001
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

[*1002] In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve late notices of claim, the County of Nassau appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.), entered March 28, 2006, as granted that branch of the petitioners’ application which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the petitioners’ application which was for leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the appellant.

General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) requires the court to consider certain factors in determining whether to grant leave to serve a late notice of claim, including whether (1) an infant is involved, (2) the movant has demonstrated a reasonable excuse for failing to serve a timely notice of claim, (3) the municipality acquired actual knowledge of the facts constituting the claim within 90 days from its accrual or a reasonable time thereafter, and (4) the delay would substantially prejudice the municipality in maintaining its defense on the merits (see Williams v Nassau County Med. Ctr., 6 NY3d 531 [2006]; Matter of Ramirez v County of Nassau, 13 AD3d 456 [2004]; Matter of Flores v County of Nassau, 8 AD3d 377 [2004]).

The appellant possessed the petitioners’ medical records from the time of the alleged malpractice and therefore had actual notice of the essential facts underlying the claim. Moreover, the petitioners demonstrated the absence of substantial prejudice as a result of the delay (see Matter of Tapia v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 27 AD3d 655 [2006]; Matter of Ramirez v County of Nassau, supra; Matter of Flores v County of Nassau, supra; Matter of McLaughlin v County of Albany, 258 AD2d 778 [1999]; Matter of McMillan v City of New York, 279 AD2d 280 [2001]).

Finally, as there was actual notice and an absence of prejudice, the lack of a reasonable excuse will not bar the granting of leave to serve a late notice of claim upon the appellant (see Matter of Hendershot v Westchester Med. Ctr., 8 AD3d 381, 382 [2004]). Schmidt, J.P., Goldstein, Angiolillo and McCarthy, JJ., concur.