New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

MARCHUK v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2001-011-576, Claim No. 103997, Motion No. M-63651


Synopsis


Defendant's motion to dismiss the claim on the basis that it was not served in a manner prescribed by Court of Claims Act §11 is granted.

Case Information

UID:
2001-011-576
Claimant(s):
BRET MARCHUK
Claimant short name:
MARCHUK
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
103997
Motion number(s):
M-63651
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
THOMAS J. McNAMARA
Claimant's attorney:
Bret Marchuk, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Honorable Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
By: Glenn C. King, Esq.Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
August 8, 2001
City:
Saratoga Springs
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision


Defendant has moved to dismiss the claim on the basis that it was not served in a mannerprescribed by Court of Claims Act §11.

Court of Claims Act §11 requires that a claim be served either personally or by certified mail return receipt requested. Failure to serve the claim in the manner prescribed by the statute results in a lack of personal jurisdiction (Thomas v State of New York, 144 AD2d 882). Defendant has provided a copy of the envelope in which the claim was received and the postage markings on the envelope indicate that mailing was done by regular mail. Although claimant has opposed the motion, he has not established that the claim was served upon the attorney general in a proper manner within 90 days of accrual. Based upon the foregoing, the motion is granted and the claim is dismissed.


August 8, 2001
Saratoga Springs, New York

HON. THOMAS J. MCNAMARA
Judge of the Court of Claims



Papers Submitted:

1. Notice of Motion dated June 13, 2001
2. Affirmation of Glenn C. King, Esq. dated June 14, 2001 with exhibit annexed
3. Letter response from Bret Marchuk dated June 21, 2001
4. Letter response from Bret Marchuk dated July 11, 2001