Matter of Hess v West Seneca Cent. School Dist.
2010 NY Slip Op 06533 [15 NY3d 813]
September 2, 2010
Court of Appeals
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, October 13, 2010


[*1]
In the Matter of Elizabeth Hess, as Parent and Guardian of Jason Hess, an Infant, Respondent,
v
West Seneca Central School District, Appellant, et al., Respondents.

Decided September 2, 2010

Matter of Hess v West Seneca Cent. School Dist., 71 AD3d 1568, reversed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Baxter Smith & Shapiro, P.C., West Seneca (Louis B. Dingeldey, Jr.), for appellant.

Collins & Brown, LLC, Buffalo (Charles H. Cobb of counsel), for respondent.

{**15 NY3d at 814} OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and that part of [*2]claimant's application that sought to file a late notice of claim against West Seneca Central School District (WSCSD) denied. We agree with the Appellate Division dissenters that claimant's proposed negligence claim against WSCSD patently lacks merit because WSCSD established that it did not create or have responsibility for the allegedly hazardous condition of the intersection where claimant's son was injured (see Pratt v Robinson, 39 NY2d 554, 560 [1976]; cf. Ernest v Red Cr. Cent. School Dist., 93 NY2d 664, 671 [1999]; see also Matter of Catherine G. v County of Essex, 3 NY3d 175, 179 [2004] ["(l)eave is not appropriate for a patently meritless claim"]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, etc.