¶1Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We agree with the Court of Claims that the proposed notice of claim lacks the appearance of merit (see, Court of Claims Act § 10 [6]); thus the court properly denied the motion to serve a late notice of claim. (Appeal from order of Court of Claims, McMahon, J.—late notice of claim.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
136 A.D.2d 965
Sawma v. State
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 29, 1988
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1988-01-29
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1990
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1988-01-29
View the full empirical analysis of this case →