New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

JONES v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-015-521, Claim No. 96933


Synopsis


Court dismissed claim to recover for loss of personal property which was not timely filed pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (3).

Case Information

UID:
2000-015-521
Claimant(s):
MAURICE JONES
Claimant short name:
JONES
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
96933
Motion number(s):

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Claimant's attorney:
Maurice Jones, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Honorable Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
By: Timothy P. Mulvey, EsquireAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
December 15, 2000
City:
Saratoga Springs
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision
This is a claim by a pro se inmate alleging the loss of certain items of personal property as a result of negligence on the part of employees of the State of New York at Mid-State Correctional Facility located in Marcy, New York. The trial of this claim was held on October 16, 2000.

Claimant alleges that on the 28
th day of May 1997 he was taken into custody and placed in administrative segregation. In the claim filed on September 9, 1997, claimant alleges negligence on the part of the State in failing to secure his personal property upon his being taken into custody.
At trial the defendant moved to dismiss the claim for failure to comply with the provisions contained in Court of Claims Act § 10 (3) which require that a claim to recover damages for injuries to property caused by the negligence or unintentional tort of an officer or employee of the State shall be filed and served upon the Attorney General within 90 days of its accrual. Upon a review of the relevant documents, including the defendant's answer which sets forth with particularity a defense based upon failure to comply with the requirements relating to timely service as required by section 11(c) of the Court of Claims Act, the Court granted the defendant's motion and dismissed the claim.

This Court does not obtain jurisdiction sufficient to adjudicate a claim unless the claimant timely serves a notice of intention to file a claim or serves and files a claim as provided in section 10 of the Court of Claims Act (
Selkirk v State of New York, 249 AD2d 818). It is clear that the date of accrual of claimant's cause of action was May 28, 1997, the date the claimant was taken into custody and his items of personal property were inventoried and taken into the possession of the State. Certainly it is claimant's contention that his claim accrued on the 28th day of May 1997. As such, this claim filed on September 9, 1997 fails to comply with the requirements of Court of Claims Act § 10 (3) and dismissal is appropriate.
Let judgment be entered accordingly.


December 15, 2000
Saratoga Springs, New York

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