Case Name: Richard Musto et al., Appellants, v. State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1989-12-20
Citations: 156 A.D.2d 962
Docket Number: 
Parties: Richard Musto et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 156
Pages: 962–963

Head Matter:
Richard Musto et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.

Opinion:
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In deciding whether to permit the filing of a late claim, the Court of Claims has broad discretion, and that court's decision will be reversed only where its discretionary power clearly has been abused (Simpson v State of New York, 96 AD2d 646; Block v New York State Thruway Auth., 69 AD2d 930). The court properly rejected movants' conten tion that their inability to secure counsel constituted an excuse for their delay in filing a claim (see, Simpson v State of New York, supra). Additionally, the movants failed to demonstrate factually that the injuries suffered by Richard Musto prevented him from consulting with an attorney within the 90-day statutory period for filing a claim (see, Court of Claims Act § 10). The court's denial of permission without prejudice to a further application is supported by the record and should not be disturbed. (Appeal from order of Court of Claims, NeMoyer, J. — late notice of claim.) Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.