Opinion
01-04291
February 6, 2002
March 11, 2002.
In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e(6), the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated March 28, 2001, as denied her motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim.
Becker D'Agostino, New York, N.Y. (Michael D'Agostino of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo and Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel), for respondents.
MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, LEO F. McGINITY, and BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioner's motion for leave to serve an amended notice of claim, as the respondents were prejudiced by the mistake in her original notice of claim (see, General Municipal Law § 50-e; Konstantinides v. City of New York, 278 A.D.2d 235; Turner v. Town of Oyster Bay, 268 A.D.2d 526, 527; Gofman v. City of New York, 268 A.D.2d 588; Zapata v. City of New York, 225 A.D.2d 543, 543-544).