Opinion
Submitted October 24, 2001.
November 19, 2001.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated January 10, 2001, which denied her motion pursuant to General Municipal Law — 50-e(5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim and granted the defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to timely serve a notice of claim.
Isaacson, Schiowitz, Korson Solny, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Korson of counsel), for appellant.
Cullen and Dykman, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Joseph C. Fegan of counsel), for respondent.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, P.J., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, NANCY E. SMITH, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim and granting the defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint (see, Matter of Kittredge v. New York City Hous. Auth., 275 A.D.2d 746; Matter of Tineo v. City of New York, 273 A.D.2d 397; Matter of Kyser v. New York City Hous. Auth., 178 A.D.2d 601).
BRACKEN, P.J., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, SMITH and ADAMS, JJ., concur.