New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

ROBERTS v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-005-553, Claim No. 97630, Motion No. M-62305


Claimant's motion for the production of certain witnesses and documents at the trial of the claim herein is granted to the extent noted and otherwise denied.

Case Information

Claimant short name:
Footnote (claimant name) :

Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
Motion number(s):
Cross-motion number(s):

Donald J. Corbett, Jr.
Claimant's attorney:
Michael D. RobertsPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Carla T. Rutigliano, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
September 20, 2000

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


On September 13, 2000, the following papers, numbered 1 to 6, were read on motion by Claimant for the production of certain witnesses and documents at the trial herein on October 4, 2000:

1, 2, 3 Notice of Motion and Affidavit and Motion Annexed

4 Opposing Affirmation

5, 6 Filed Papers: Claim, Answer

Upon the foregoing papers, this motion is granted to the extent noted and otherwise denied.

The claim herein alleges an assault upon Claimant by a fellow inmate on or about April 6, 1996.

Claimant seeks C-Block log book entries between March 30, 1996 and April 14, 1996, and between March 15, 1996 and March 20, 1996. The Defendant notes that the same request was made by Claimant in discovery demands received on March 20, 1998 and objected to by the Defendant. However, Claimant never moved to compel production thereof, and Defendant objects to use of the current motion to produce at trial items to which it objected in discovery. The Defendant has already provided entries for April 6, 1996, the date of the incident, and between March 20 and April 6, 1996. In any event I find these dates have the appearance of relevance to the date of the incident, and the other dates are either after the incident or too remote before it. That part of the motion is denied.

In Paragraph 3, Claimant seeks entries in the Recreation Log Book for the main recreational yard dealing with inmates housed in C-Block between March 15 and April 7, 1996. In a response dated January 11, 1999, Defendant objected to the same request contained in a March 7, 1998 discovery demand, and no motion to compel (CPLR 3124) was made. This request is in the nature of discovery and too vague to generate specific documents, and in any event, Claimant has not described the relevance or materiality of any such documents. This request is denied.

Claimant seeks the production of Correction Officer Pellant, Sergeant Sheridan, Ann E. Driscollic, R.N., Lieutenant Jackson, Dr. Connor and Nurse Sherman of Auburn Memorial Hospital, and certain other unnamed employees at Auburn, none of whom were witnesses to the incident, and most of whom would only address Claimant's condition and injuries after the assault. If the medical records are insufficient or inadequate to address Claimant's injuries, I may reconsider some of these witnesses in the interest of justice.

However, Claimant asserts that Correction Officer Gardner was allegedly not at his assigned post at the time of the incident, and he seeks his testimony. If C.O. Gardner is still employed at Auburn, the Defendant is directed to produce him at trial without the necessity of subpoena. The Claimant also seeks (in Paragraph 10) an unnamed correction officer who supposedly observed the inmates' movements prior to the incident. Without the name of the officer, I cannot direct the appearance of any particular individual and thus this request is denied. The names of such witnesses should have been sought earlier.

Accordingly, the motion is granted to the extent noted and otherwise denied.

September 20, 2000
Rochester, New York

Judge of the Court of Claims