Opinion
February 5, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint as untimely inasmuch as the action was not commenced within the applicable Statute of Limitations. Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the limitations period was not tolled by either the 30-day waiting period found in General Municipal Law § 50-i (1)(b) or the period for an examination of claim found in General Municipal Law § 50-h (see, General Municipal Law § 50-i, [3]; Baez v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 80 N.Y.2d 571; Astromovich v. Huntington School Dist. No. 3, 80 A.D.2d 628, affd 56 N.Y.2d 634; Rose v. Metro N. Commuter R.R., 143 A.D.2d 993; Lowinger v. City of New York, 64 A.D.2d 888; Stazio v. County of Albany, 60 A.D.2d 934). O'Brien, J.P., Sullivan, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.