Opinion
November 19, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In granting the petitioner's application for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the Supreme Court did not exercise its discretion in an abusive or improvident manner. Considering all of the circumstances revealed in the affidavits submitted to the court, including the fact that the New York City Housing Authority had actual notice of the occurrence upon which the petitioner's claim is based, and was not prejudiced by the delay, we see no reason to substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court (see generally, Matter of Ziecker v. Town of Orchard Park, 70 A.D.2d 422, affd. 51 N.Y.2d 957; Rice v. New York City Hous. Auth., 149 A.D.2d 495; Wolf v. State of New York, 140 A.D.2d 692; Whitehead v. Centerville Fire Dist., 90 A.D.2d 655; cf., Gagliardi v. New York City Hous. Auth., 88 A.D.2d 610). Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.