New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CANZATER-SMITH v.THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-005-534, Claim No. 101754, Motion Nos. M-61125, M-61175


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2000-005-534
Claimant(s):
JEFFREY CANZATER-SMITH
Claimant short name:
CANZATER-SMITH
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
101754
Motion number(s):
M-61125, M-61175
Cross-motion number(s):

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

Signature date:
August 18, 2000
City:
Rochester
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision


On March 22, 2000, the following papers, numbered 1 to 7, were read on motion (M-61125) by the Defendant for dismissal of the claim and on motion (M-61175) by the Claimant for a speedy trial and summary judgment:


1, 2 Notice of Motion (M-61125) and Affidavit Annexed

3, 4 Claimant's Notice of Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Motion and Affidavit in Support


5, 6 Reply, Claimant's Motion (M-61175) for Summary Judgment and Speedy Trial, Affidavit and Exhibits Annexed

  1. Filed Papers: Claim

Upon the foregoing papers, the motion to dismiss is granted and all other relief is denied.

The Defendant alleges that a Notice of Intention herein was served upon it on October 16, 1998, and that on January 10, 2000, it received, via regular U.S. Mail, the unverified claim filed by Claimant and given claim number 101754.

The Defendant moves for dismissal of the claim, in lieu of filing an answer, on the ground that Claimant failed to effectuate service in the manner required by Court of Claims Act §11(a), to wit, by certified mail, return receipt requested, and as such, Claimant has failed to obtain jurisdiction over the Defendant.

In a decision and order dated November 3, 1999, in Motion No. M-59729 and Cross-Motion No. CM-59869, I dismissed Claim No. 100379, and granted Claimant permission to serve and file a late claim within 30 days of service of a file-stamped copy of that order.

By letter dated December 17, 1999 (Exhibit C) the Clerk wrote to Claimant, suggesting, inter alia, that Claimant apply for an extension of time to serve and file his claim, a suggestion which was not taken.

In response to the instant motion, Claimant totally fails to respond to the allegations of improper service of his claim in derogation of §11(a) and seems to demand a Speedy Trial and Summary Judgment in his favor. He does not dispute the improper service and thus, in the absence of jurisdiction over the Defendant, the Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted and the claim is dismissed. Accordingly, Claimant's motion is denied as moot.


August 18, 2000
Rochester, New York

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