three main factors (New York) · Go Syfert
← New York issues

three main factors in New York

11 New York opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2019 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Friend v. Town of West Senecagreen
nyappdiv · 2010 · cited in 5 New York opinions naming this issue, 2013–2019
2 sentences

2019Seneca , 71 AD3d 1406, 1407 [4th Dept 2010]; see generally § 50-e [5]).

2014Seneca, 71 AD3d 1406, 1407 [2010]; see generally § 50-e [5]). ‘[T]he presence or absence of any one of the numerous relevant factors the court must consider is not determinative’ (Salvaggio v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 203 AD2d 938, 938-939 [1994]), and ‘[t]he court is vested with broad discretion to grant or deny the application’ (Wetzel Servs.

45
Salvaggio v. Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp.green
nyappdiv · 1994 · cited in 4 New York opinions naming this issue, 2013–2014
2 sentences

2014Seneca, 71 AD3d 1406, 1407 [2010]; see generally § 50-e [5]). ‘[T]he presence or absence of any one of the numerous relevant factors the court must consider is not determinative’ (Salvaggio v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 203 AD2d 938, 938-939 [1994]), and ‘[t]he court is vested with broad discretion to grant or deny the application’ (Wetzel Servs.

2014Seneca, 71 AD3d 1406, 1407 [2010]; see generally § 50-e [5]). ‘[T]he presence or absence of any one of the numerous relevant factors the court must consider is not determinative’ (Salvaggio v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 203 AD2d 938, 938-939 [1994]), and ‘[t]he court is vested with broad discretion to grant or deny the application’ (Wetzel Servs.

44
Concourse Nursing Home v. Stategreen
ny · 2004 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

33
Santana v. Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp.green
nyappdiv · 2003 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

33
DALTON, II, DAVID H. v. AKRON CENTRAL SCHOOLSgreen
nyappdiv · 2013 · cited in 6 New York opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017“The three main factors are ‘whether the claimant has shown a reasonable excuse for the delay, whether the [governmental entity] had actual knowledge of the facts surrounding the claim within 90 days of its accrual, and whether the delay would cause substantial prejudice to the [governmental entity]’ ” (Dalton, 107 AD3d at 1518 ; see generally § 50-e [5]).

2017“The three main factors are ‘whether the claimant has shown a reasonable excuse for the delay, whether the [governmental entity] had actual knowledge of the facts surrounding the claim within 90 days of its accrual, and whether the delay would cause substantial prejudice to the [governmental entity]’ ” (Dalton, 107 AD3d at 1518 ; see generally § 50-e [5]).

26
Farrell v. City of New Yorkgreen
nyappdiv · 1993 · cited in 3 New York opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

2017An “fe]rror concerning the identity of the governmental entity to be served” can constitute a reasonable excuse for the delay “provided that a prompt application for relief is made after discovery of the error” (Matter of Farrell v City of New York, 191 AD2d 698, 699 [1993]; see Santana v Western Regional Off-Track Betting Corp., 2 AD3d 1304, 1305 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 704 [2004]).

23

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Dalton v. Akron Central Schools neutral
ny · 2013
2 sentences

2017Schools, 107 AD3d 1517, 1518 [2013], affd 22 NY3d 1000 [2013]).

2017Schools, 107 AD3d 1517, 1518 [2013], affd 22 NY3d 1000 [2013]).

32017–2017

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NY § N.Y. Education Law § 3813 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

NY 11 (2013–2019) WA 3 (2016–2020) MI 2 (1999–2000) MS 2 (2006–2013)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check