New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

DAILEY v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-015-069, Claim No. 099041, Motion No. M-61921


Synopsis


A request for an extension of time in which to file appraisals will be granted upon a demonstration of good cause.

Case Information

UID:
2000-015-069
Claimant(s):
WILLIAM E. DAILEY, INC.
Claimant short name:
DAILEY
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
099041
Motion number(s):
M-61921
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Claimant's attorney:
Devorsetz Stinziano Gilberti Heintz & Smith, P.C.By: Sidney Devorsetz, Esquire
Defendant's attorney:
Honorable Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
By: John J. PickettAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
August 21, 2000
City:
Saratoga Springs
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision

The motion of the defendant for an order pursuant to 22 NYCRR 206.21 (g) extending to September 15, 2000 the time for both parties to file appraisals, expert reports and a trial term note of issue is granted. This is a claim to recover $2,000,000.00 in direct damages and $1,300,000.00 in consequential damages as the result of the Department of Transportation's appropriation of approximately 20 acres of the claimant's stone quarry located on Farmer's Inn Road in the Town of Hoosick, New York as part of the construction of the New York portion of the Bennington Bypass. The claim was filed on September 28, 1998 and the parties have received prior extensions of their time to file appraisals and other expert reports pursuant to 22 NYCRR 206.21 (g). Claimant has not opposed the motion.

In order to grant the requested extension the Court must be satisfied that the moving party has shown "good cause". Defendant has submitted six reasons why there is good cause to permit the extension including the fact that the scope of the appraisal was not defined until this Court's decision and order upon the defendant's summary judgment motion which was filed on January 28, 2000.

In the Court's view, the moving party has established the requisite good cause required to grant the motion.


August 21, 2000
Saratoga Springs, New York

HON. FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims


The Court considered the following papers:
  1. Notice of motion dated June 23, 2000;
  2. Affirmation of John J. Pickett dated June 23, 2000.