New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

BOSWELL v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-007-018, Claim No. 99342, Motion No. M-61651


Synopsis


Defendant has made an application for the court to issue judicial subpoenas directing the production of claimant's employment and union records. Motion granted.

Case Information

UID:
2000-007-018
Claimant(s):
BRAD C. BOSWELL
Claimant short name:
BOSWELL
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
99342
Motion number(s):
M-61651
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
John L. Bell
Claimant's attorney:
Martin, Harding and Mazzotti, LLP(Elizabeth A. Graziane, Esq., of Counsel)
Defendant's attorney:
Hon. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
(Dennis M. Acton, Esq., Assistant Attorney General,of Counsel)
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 25, 2000
City:
Plattsburgh
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision


Defendant has made an application for the court to issue certain judicial subpoenas duces tecum. The return date of the motion was May 22, 2000. The following papers were read and considered by the court:

Notice of Motion, Affidavit of Dennis M. Acton,
Esq., Annexed Exhibits 1, 2, 3


Affirmation in Opposition of Elizabeth A.
Graziane, Esq. 4

Filed Papers: Claim, Answer 5, 6

On September 18, 1997, claimant was operating a motorcycle when he was in an accident with a State Trooper at the intersection of Oak Street and Riley Avenue in the City of Plattsburgh, Clinton County. He contends, inter alia, that his injuries resulted in lost wages and otherwise adversely affected his employment. Defendant ostensibly served a disclosure demand in which it sought releases executed by claimant permitting it to obtain claimant's employment and union records. Defendant states that claimant's employer, Georgia Pacific Company, refused to honor the releases. Defendant further states that the response from claimant's union, Local 387, was "vague and uncertain." Defendant has served a copy of the motion upon claimant's employer and union, and neither has submitted any opposition to defendant's application.

Claimant's counsel partially objects to defendant's application upon the grounds that the request to claimant's employer is too broad and that counsel was not previously provided with a copy of the union's response as required by the release.

Defendant's request to review claimant's employment record is reasonable in light of the nature of claimant's allegations. Although the court is directing that claimant's employer and union produce certain records in their possession pertaining to claimant, it is not directing the employer or union to compile information in order to create records that do not already exist (see, Matter of General Elec. Co. v Macejka, 252 AD2d 700).

Defendant is directed to submit proposed subpoenas that are consistent with the court's decision within 10 days. A copy of this decision and order shall be served with the subpoenas. Copies of any documents obtained pursuant to the subpoenas shall be provided to claimant's counsel.

Defendant's motion is granted, in part, as set forth herein.


May 25, 2000
Plattsburgh, New York

HON. JOHN L. BELL
Judge of the Court of Claims