Case ID: ny_223/html/0596-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rose E. Tynan, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent.
    
      Tynan v. City of New York, 174 App. Div. 922, affirmed.
    (Argued March 11, 1918;
    decided March 26, 1918.)
    Appeal from a "judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered August 7, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by-plaintiff through the negligence of the defendant. The complaint was dismissed solely on the ground of the insufficiency of the notice of claim, the material portion of which read as follows: “Please take notice that I, Rose E. Tynan, * * * have a claim against The City of New York for personal injuries sustained by me * * * at the northeast corner of Flushing Avenue and Garden Street, in front of the premises 844 Flushing Avenue in the Borough of Brooklyn, City of* New York, by being thrown or caused to fall by reason of the defective, improper, unsafe and unsuitable condition of the crosswalk, pavement or sidewalk.”
    
      Theodore H. Lord and Arthur K. Wing for appellant.
    
      William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (William B. Carswell of counsel), for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed., with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ. Dissenting: Cardozo, J.