New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

ABREU v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2002-019-544, Claim No. 105075, Motion No. M-65284


Synopsis


Claimant's motion for the appointment of an interpreter at his unscheduled trial is denied without prejudice.

Case Information

UID:
2002-019-544
Claimant(s):
MANOLO ABREU
Claimant short name:
ABREU
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
105075
Motion number(s):
M-65284
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Claimant's attorney:
MANOLO ABREU, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: Joseph F. Romani, Assistant Attorney General,of counsel
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
July 2, 2002
City:
Binghamton
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant, a pro se inmate, requests the appointment of an interpreter. By way of letter, the State of New York (hereinafter "State") indicates that it takes no position on this motion.


The Court has considered the following papers in connection with this motion:
  1. Claim, filed October 18, 2001.
  2. "Motion to Appoint Transtor [sic]", Motion No. M-65284, filed May 30, 2002.
  3. Copy of letter from Joseph F. Romani, AAG to David B. Klingaman, Chief Clerk, dated June 5, 2002.
This Court construes this motion as an application for an interpreter at trial. However, inasmuch as this matter has yet to be scheduled for trial said request is deemed premature. Claimant is directed to make a future application for such assistance when he is advised by the Court, in writing, that his trial has been scheduled. The Court notes that this Claim, as with all pro se claims, will be scheduled as soon as practicable. However, the Court further notes that this Claim filed on October 18, 2001 is not scheduled for the Court's 2002 prison term. Thus, it is anticipated that this matter will not be scheduled for trial until either the 2003 or perhaps even the 2004 prison term. Claimant will receive a letter from the Court when his trial is ultimately scheduled. Claimant should submit a letter request to the Court requesting the assistance of an interpreter for trial upon receipt of the letter notifying him of a trial date.


To the extent that Claimant's motion can be construed as a request for an interpreter during the discovery phase of this litigation, Claimant cites no authority allowing the appointment of a translator for such purpose. In any event, the Court notes that Claimant apparently has had the assistance of an interpreter throughout this matter since he has filed and served the Claim; prepared and served discovery demands including a Demand For Discovery and Admissions filed May 9, 2002 and Interrogatories filed February 4, 2002; as well as submitted a letter to the Clerk of the Court advising of a change of address. Needless to say, it appears that Claimant has the assistance he needs to pursue discovery.


Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, it is ORDERED that Claimant's motion for the appointment of an interpreter, Motion No. M-65284 is DENIED without prejudice.


July 2, 2002
Binghamton, New York

HON. FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Judge of the Court of Claims