From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Beckerman v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 29, 1996
223 A.D.2d 702 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

January 29, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the petition is granted.

The instant proceeding arose from an "improper practice charge" the petitioner filed with the State of New York Public Employment Relations Board. In its amended answer the respondent asserted that the petitioner had failed to serve a notice of claim pursuant to Education Law § 3813 (1).

Education Law § 3813 (1) provides that no action or special proceeding shall be maintained against a school district "unless it shall appear by and as an allegation in the complaint or necessary moving papers that a written verified claim upon which such action or special proceeding is founded was presented to the governing body of said district or school within three months after the accrual of such claim".

Although the petitioner failed to serve a notice of claim within three months after the claim accrued, we find that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioner leave to serve a late notice of claim. The record reveals that the respondent was apprised of the facts constituting the petitioner's improper practice charge less than one month after the claim accrued. Moreover, the respondent has not demonstrated that it will be prejudiced by permitting the late notice of claim to be served. In addition, the petitioner's improper practice charge, dated September 13, 1993, was based upon the respondent's August 31, 1993, resolution. Thus, the improper practice charge was filed within the four month Statute of Limitations period set forth in 4 NYCRR 204.1 (a) (1) ( see also, Education Law § 3813 [2-b]).

Under these circumstances, the petition should not have been dismissed and the petitioner's application for leave to serve a late notice of claim should have been granted ( see, Education Law § 3813 [2-a]; Matter of Nyack Bd. of Educ. v Capolino Design Renovation, 114 A.D.2d 849, affd 68 N.Y.2d 647; Quirk v Morrissey, 106 A.D.2d 498). Santucci, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Beckerman v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 29, 1996
223 A.D.2d 702 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Matter of Beckerman v. Board of Education

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of LEON BECKERMAN, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 29, 1996

Citations

223 A.D.2d 702 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
636 N.Y.S.2d 860