New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

KING v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2002-009-006, Claim No. 96696, Motion No. M-64476


Synopsis


Claimant's motion to re-instate his claim was granted.

Case Information

UID:
2002-009-006
Claimant(s):
JAMEL A. KING
Claimant short name:
KING
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
96696
Motion number(s):
M-64476
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
NICHOLAS V. MIDEY, JR.
Claimant's attorney:
WILLIAM T. MARTIN & ASSOCIATES
BY: William T. Martin, Esq.,Of counsel.
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General
BY: Edward F. McArdle, Esq.,
Assistant Attorney GeneralOf Counsel.
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
February 19, 2002
City:
Syracuse
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant has brought this motion seeking an order reinstating the claim.

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


Affirmation in Opposition, with Exhibits 3

Reply Affirmation, with Exhibits 4

On November 27, 2001, a conference was held regarding this claim, as part of a calendar call scheduled by the Court upon notice provided to counsel for both parties. As a convenience to claimant's counsel, he was permitted to appear at this calendar call by telephone, but he was not available for the scheduled call at the designated time. A paralegal from claimant's counsel's office did take the call and appeared on behalf of claimant's counsel. The paralegal advised the Court that claimant's counsel was unavailable, but was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation to the Court as to why claimant and his counsel had failed to comply with a prior scheduling order issued by this Court, which required a note of issue and certificate of readiness to be served and filed by September 4, 2001. As a result, by Order dated November 27, 2001, this Court dismissed the within claim, without prejudice, based upon a failure to comply with the prior Order of this Court dated April 20, 2001,

Claimant has now moved to reinstate the claim. In his supporting affirmation, claimant's counsel advises the Court that due to other court ordered appearances, it had been necessary for him to cancel previously scheduled depositions in this claim on two different occasions, and therefore he was unable to comply with the deadlines set forth in the scheduling order of April 20, 2001. The Court notes, however, that claimant's counsel did not request any extension of the deadlines set forth in this scheduling order, but rather chose to simply ignore these time-frames.

Nevertheless, it does appear that there has been some effort to advance this claim through the discovery phase. Some, but not all, depositions have been held, and the Court is satisfied that this claim has not been abandoned.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, that Motion No. M-64476 is hereby GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED, that Claim No. 96696 is hereby reinstated, and is restored to this Court's calendar of open and untried claims; and it is further

ORDERED, that all discovery, including the deposition of all of the State's knowledgeable witnesses, shall be completed by August 30, 2002, and that claimant is directed to serve and file his note of issue and certificate of readiness on or before September 30, 2002.


February 19, 2002
Syracuse, New York

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