Justice Kathryn Freed
Pasha moved to compel New York City to accept an amended notice of claim. The city cross-moved for dismissal arguing Pasha failed to comply with General Municipal Law. Pasha claimed he was injured when a taxi he was a passenger in struck a large "open and obvious" pothole in the roadway as the cab was being operated in a negligent manner. He argued the city was also negligent by failing to provide a barricade or other warning of the dangerous condition and failed to properly maintain the roadway. The city alleged Pasha’s deadline to seek leave to materially amend his notice of claim expired. The court noted GML §50-e(6) authorized it to grant leave to serve an amended notice of claim where the error in the original notice was made in good faith, and the other party was not prejudiced. It found Pasha testified at his administrative hearing, held only 40 days after filing the notice of claim, and within the statutory 90 day notice of claim notification period, properly identified the place the incident occurred, as did the police report. Hence, the court ruled the city was in no way prejudiced by the original notice identifying the incorrect street of the incident, granting Pasha’s motion, and denying the city’s cross-motion.