Opinion
November 13, 1981
Appeal from the Monroe Supreme Court, Pine, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Denman and Moule, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: On this appeal from an order denying claimant's motion for permission to serve and file a late notice of claim, we agree with Special Term's determination that claimant failed to show that the public corporation timely acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim (see General Municipal Law, § 50-e, subd 5). In affirming, however, we note that had claimant demonstrated that the chief of police had timely acquired such actual knowledge it would have constituted knowledge of the municipality. Cases relied upon by Special Term and holding that knowledge of its police officers is not knowledge of the public corporation (see Williams v. Town of Irondequoit, 59 A.D.2d 1049; Phillips v. State of New York, 36 A.D.2d 679; Bommarito v. State of New York, 35 A.D.2d 458) would apply where the claimed knowledge is that of the alleged tort-feasors and not, as here, where the claimed knowledge is that of the person having authority over the police department and responsibility for the conduct of its officers (see Matter of Waterhouse v. Hastings, 73 A.D.2d 1034).