New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

WARE v. STATE OF NEW YORK, #2002-018-143, Claim No. 98197, Motion No. M-64804


Synopsis


Court grants defendant's motion for summary judgment as a result of a previous preclusion order. Claimant cannot, as a matter of law, establish the defendant's liability.

Case Information

UID:
2002-018-143
Claimant(s):
BOBBY WARE
Claimant short name:
WARE
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
98197
Motion number(s):
M-64804
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Claimant's attorney:
BOBBY WAREPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General of the State of New York
By: EDWARD F. McARDLE, ESQUIREAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
June 6, 2002
City:
Syracuse
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision
Defendant brings a motion for summary judgment. No response was received from the claimant.

The claim seeks damages for the negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault and battery, as a result of the State allowing an inmate at Riverview Correctional Facility to assault the claimant and cause injuries. Defendant served a demand for interrogatories upon the claimant on October 11, 2000. Claimant failed to respond. As a result of claimant's failure to answer the demand, defendant brought a motion seeking an order of preclusion. This Court granted the motion by decision and order filed on October 1, 2001, giving claimant sixty days from the date a copy of the order with notice of entry was served upon him to reply to defendant's demand. Those sixty days have passed, and claimant has again failed to respond to the defendant's demand for interrogatories.

Claimant is thus precluded from offering any evidence or testimony at trial regarding the information demanded by defendant's interrogatories. As a result claimant cannot, as a matter of law, establish the defendant's liability. Defendant's motion is GRANTED, and the claim is hereby DISMISSED.

June 6, 2002
Syracuse, New York

HON. DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Judge of the Court of Claims


The Court considered the following documents in deciding this motion:

Notice of Motion........................................................................................1

Affirmation of Edward F. McArdle, Esquire, Assistant Attorney General

in support, with all exhibits attached thereto...............................2


Claimant did not respond to the motion.