New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

WASHINGTON v. STATE OF NEW YORK, #2002-005-534, Claim No. 100269, Motion No. M-65100


Synopsis


Defendant's motion for an order of preclusion is granted to the extent noted.

Case Information

UID:
2002-005-534
Claimant(s):
MICHAEL WASHINGTON
Claimant short name:
WASHINGTON
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
100269
Motion number(s):
M-65100
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
DONALD J. CORBETT, JR.
Claimant's attorney:
Michael Washington,Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Gordon J. Cuffy, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 15, 2002
City:
Rochester
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

On May 15, 2002, the following papers, numbered 1 to 4, were read on motion by Defendant for an order of preclusion:
1, 2 Notice of Motion, Affirmation and Exhibits Annexed
  1. Opposing Papers
3, 4 Filed Papers: Claim, Answer

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

This claim has been scheduled since December 28, 2001, for trial at Auburn Correctional Facility on June 19, 2002. The claim herein was filed on April 29, 1999, alleging the Defendant's liability relating to an assault upon Claimant by a fellow inmate at Cayuga Correctional Facility on or about February 18, 1999. On or about May 25, 1999, contemporaneously with the Answer, Defendant filed a Demand for a Verified Bill of Particulars. It appears from the Court's file and the lack of opposition to the motion herein, that no responses to said demand have ever been prepared or served, let alone filed.

Defendant seeks an order pursuant to CPLR 3124 and 3126 to compel answers to the said demand, or in the alternative, to preclude Claimant from offering any evidence in support of this matter. On March 18, 2002, Defendant sent a "good faith" letter to Claimant demanding a response to the aforesaid demand (Exhibit B) within thirty days. There having been no response to said demand, Defendant has brought the instant motion for relief.

Claimant having defaulted on the motion and having made no request for any adjournment, the motion of the Defendant for an order pursuant to CPLR 3042 precluding the Claimant from offering any proof at the trial of this claim with respect to the matters of which particulars were demanded by the Defendant's demand for a Bill of Particulars (Exhibit A) is granted unless the claimant serves upon the defendant a Verified Bill of Particulars within ten days of the service upon him of a copy of a file-stamped copy of this order. Because of the proximity of trial the Clerk is directed to serve the order herein.


May 15, 2002
Rochester, New York

HON. DONALD J. CORBETT, JR.
Judge of the Court of Claims