New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

KNIGHTS V. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2001-009-005, Claim No. 99939, Motion No. M-62831


Synopsis


Claimant's motion to compel discovery denied without prejudice.

Case Information

UID:
2001-009-005
Claimant(s):
TOMMIE C. KNIGHTS
Claimant short name:
KNIGHTS
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
99939
Motion number(s):
M-62831
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Nicholas V. Midey, Jr.
Claimant's attorney:
PAUL F. SHANAHAN, ESQ.
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General
BY: Michael R. O'Neill, Esq.,
Assistant Attorney GeneralOf Counsel.
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
February 16, 2001
City:
Syracuse
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant has brought this motion seeking an order compelling discovery and imposing sanctions against the defendant.

The following papers were considered by the Court in connection with this motion:
Notice of Motion, Attorney Affidavit, with Exhibits 1,2


Affidavit in Response, with Exhibit 3

In this motion, claimant seeks to compel the production of certain photographs which were previously demanded, as well as to schedule the depositions of several State employee witnesses.

In his response to this motion, Assistant Attorney General Michael R. O'Neill, recently assigned to the defense of this claim, has attached a copy of correspondence forwarded by him to claimant's attorney (see Exhibit A to Item 3) in which he has enclosed photographs and reports, and has also indicated that he was making arrangements to schedule the depositions of the State employee witnesses.

Furthermore, there is a scheduling order in effect requiring all disclosure to be completed by April 30, 2001.

It appears, therefore, that discovery, including the production of documents and scheduling of depositions, is proceeding in accordance with the scheduling order and without need for further Court intervention at this time. Should claimant encounter further difficulties in obtaining responses to discovery demands, or in the scheduling of depositions, he has the option of renewing this motion or applying to the Court for an extension of the discovery deadline.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, that Motion No. M-62831 is hereby DENIED, without prejudice.


February 16, 2001
Syracuse, New York

HON. NICHOLAS V. MIDEY, JR.
Judge of the Court of Claims