New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

BONDS v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2000-029-004, Claim No. 93713


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2000-029-004
Claimant(s):
JOHNNIE BONDS
Claimant short name:
BONDS
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
93713
Motion number(s):

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
STEPHEN J. MIGNANO
Claimant's attorney:
Johnnie BondsPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General for the State of New YorkBy: Elyse Angelico, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
August 9, 2000
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant, an inmate appearing
pro se, claims negligence on the part of the defendant for the alleged loss of certain items of claimant's personal property which occurred on December 21, 1995 when claimant was transferred from the Tappan Correctional Facility (hereinafter Tappan) to Sing Sing Correctional Facility (hereinafter Sing Sing). This matter was tried at Sing Sing on July 25, 2000.

Claimant testified that the claim occurred on December 21, 1995 when, in the course of his transfer from Tappan to Sing Sing, the State allegedly lost various items of personal property including cigars, cigarettes, coffee, and several items of arts and crafts material. Both parties stipulated to the fact that no I-64 Form exists for this transfer. As a result, the claimant cannot demonstrate what property was given back to him at the time he arrived at Sing Sing and what property, if any, was missing from that property in his possession when he left Tappan.
The claimant further asserts that he was damaged by the failure of the defendant to retain the appropriate I-64 Form on file, allegedly in violation of the State's own rules. However, claimant did not introduce any documentary or other evidence regarding the rule which he alleges was violated and was unable to specify with any particularity the exact nature of the violation. Further, claimant was unable to show any causal relationship between the failure of defendant to have an I-64 Form on file and his alleged loss of property. Finally, claimant failed to produce an I-64 Form covering the property which was in his possession at the time he left Tappan. As a result, the Court finds that claimant has not sustained his burden of proof in any aspect of this matter. He has failed to demonstrate what property was in his possession when he left Tappan. He has further failed to demonstrate what property was given back to him at Sing Sing and in what manner such property was deficient. Finally, claimant has failed to establish any causal nexus between the non-existence of the Sing Sing I-64 Form and any injury suffered by claimant.


At the close of the claimant's case, the State moved to dismiss based upon the failure of claimant to establish a prima facie claim for bailment (see, Claflin v Meyer, 75 NY 260; Northbrook Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v D.J.L. Warehouse Corp., 160 AD2d 917; Harrison v State of New York, Claim No. 90980, filed 6/11/97, Benza, J.). This Court reserved decision on that motion, and such motion is now granted, and the claim is dismissed. The Chief Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.


August 9, 2000
White Plains, New York

HON. STEPHEN J. MIGNANO
Judge of the Court of Claims