Case Name: Harold Bonilla, Appellant, v. City of New York et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1996-10-28
Citations: 232 A.D.2d 597
Docket Number: 
Parties: Harold Bonilla, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 232
Pages: 597–598

Head Matter:
Harold Bonilla, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.
[648 NYS2d 1005]

Opinion:
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated Febru ary 16, 1995, which denied his motion pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (6) for leave to serve an amended notice of claim.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff's motion to amend his notice of claim so as to include theories that were not referred to either directly or indirectly in the notice of claim (see, Wanczowski v City of New York, 186 AD2d 397; Mazzilli v City of New York, 154 AD2d 355, 357; Mojica v New York City Tr. Auth., 117 AD2d 722). Rosenblatt, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.