New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

ALLAH v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-005-515, Claim No. 99591, Motion No. M-60376


Synopsis


Inmate's motion for summary judgment alleging negligent hiring and training of a correction officer is denied.

Case Information

UID:
2000-005-515
Claimant(s):
JAMEL ALLAH
Claimant short name:
ALLAH
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
99591
Motion number(s):
M-60376
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Donald J. Corbett, Jr.
Claimant's attorney:
Jamel AllahPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Timothy P. Mulvey, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 22, 2000
City:
Rochester
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision


The following papers, numbered 1 to 6, were read on motion by Claimant for summary judgment:

Papers Numbered

Notice of Motion, Affidavits and Exhibits Annexed 1, 2, 3

Opposing Affidavit and Exhibit Annexed 4

Reply Affidavit 5

Filed Papers: Claim 6

Upon the foregoing papers, this motion is denied.


Claimant seeks summary judgment on this claim alleging, inter alia, negligent hiring, training and supervision of a correction officer, purportedly causing physical and mental (emotional) distress.

The underlying incident alleges that certain correction officers forced Claimant to go outside during inclement weather, in contravention of facility rules and purportedly with malevolent intentions. Regardless, the Defendant, through the Superintendent of the Cayuga Correctional Facility, reviewed Claimant's grievance with respect to the incident in question and denied the grievance, finding, inter alia, that the correction officer had not acted maliciously with disregard of Claimant's welfare. Without examining the question in any more detail, it is obvious that triable issues of facts have been raised, that the intentions of the correction officer(s) are not determined, and there is no showing whatsoever related to negligent hiring, supervision or training, let alone Department of Correctional Services or facility policy.

I further note that the affidavit of the Superintendent of Cayuga Correction Facility provides sufficient "first-hand knowledge", as opposed to an affidavit of counsel to which Claimant erroneously refers, to defeat this summary judgment motion.

Here it is clear that material disputed questions of fact have been raised, requiring a trial to resolve the same and it is abundantly clear that summary judgment may not lie.

Claimant's conclusory statements and opinions do not establish facts merely because he asserts them. This matter will be resolved upon a trial of the claim.

The motion is denied.


May 22, 2000
Rochester, New York

HON. DONALD J. CORBETT, JR.
Judge of the Court of Claims