New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

JACOBS v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2001-005-536, Claim No. 103755, Motion No. M-63819


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):

Claimant's attorney:
Alonzo Jacobs,Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Jeane L. Strickland Smith, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
October 23, 2001

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


On September 19, 2001, the following papers, numbered 1 to 7, were read on motion by Claimant to compel discovery and inspection:

1, 2, 3 Notice of Motion, Motion and Affidavit in Support
  1. Opposing Papers
4, 5, 6, 7 Filed Papers: Claim; Answer; Claimant's Notice for Discovery and Inspection; Good Faith letter of April 5, 2001

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

Claimant seeks to compel the Defendant to permit Claimant pro se (no attorney has appeared on his behalf) to "inspect, copy and/or photograph any and/or all records, directives, papers, reports, medical records, files, books, test reports, x-rays, documents, and memorandums "related and relevant" to his cause of action in Claim No. 103755, as well as other items noticed in a Notice for Discovery and Inspection (CPLR 3120) dated April 5, 2001, filed with the Clerk on April 9, 2001, and served upon the Defendant. As of the date of this motion, Claimant avers under oath, that he has not received any of the documents requested therein, and apparently has had no communication from the Defendant. Claimant characterizes the said demand as seeking policies, codes, rules and regulations of the Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) with respect to inmate medical records, medical treatment, transfer of medical records, etc., as specified therein, and essentially all files maintained by DOCS with respect to Claimant's actual medical care.

Claimant alleges that on or about June 5, 2001, he wrote to the Defendant in furtherance of the said Notice for Discovery and Inspection of April 5, making a good faith request for the Defendant's compliance or objections thereto. A copy of said letter was filed with the Clerk of the Court. Claimant avers that he has had no response from the Defendant to his "good faith" letter of June 5, 2001.

Pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 206.8:

(a) There shall be compliance with the procedures prescribed in the CPLR for the bringing of motions. In addition, no motion shall be filed with the court unless a notice of motion is served and filed, with proof of service, with the motion papers.

(b) No motion relating to disclosure shall be placed on the calendar without counsel for the respective parties first conferring

with the assigned judge. This subdivision shall not apply to prisoner pro se claims.

The Defendant has not appeared or otherwise responded to the motion papers herein, and has defaulted.

The Defendant has not sought a protective order or objected to the said Notice as being burdensome or objectionable in any way (CPLR 3122). Accordingly, since the Defendant has not raised any objections to the relief requested in this motion or the items contained in the said Notice, the motion is granted, and the Defendant shall, within 30 days of service upon it of a file-stamped copy of this order, provide the demanded materials, except to the extent that the Defendant, if it is so advised, may object to specific items for which disclosure is hereby directed as may affect security concerns in the correctional facilities. Any such objections related to security concerns shall be provided to the Court in writing with specificity within 30 days of service of a file-stamped copy of this order.

October 23, 2001
Rochester, New York

Judge of the Court of Claims