New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

MITCHELL v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2002-032-016, Claim No. 105681, Motion No. M-65862


Synopsis


Pro se inmate's request that the Court waive the requirment that motion papers be filed in triplicate (an original and two copies) is denied because no compelling reason is shown.


Case Information

UID:
2002-032-016
Claimant(s):
DONTIE S. MITCHELL
Claimant short name:
MITCHELL
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
105681
Motion number(s):
M-65862
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
JUDITH A. HARD
Claimant's attorney:
Dontie S. Mitchell, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Hon. Eliot Spitzer, NYS Attorney General
By: Elyse J. Angelico, Esq., Assistant Attorney General,Of Counsel
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
December 11, 2002
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision
Claimant, who has filed a claim alleging that he was wrongfully confined to Special Housing Unit (SHU) when transferred from Sing Sing Correctional Facility to Upstate Correctional Facility, has moved for an order waiving the requirement that litigants file an original and two copies of any motion papers (22 NYCRR §206.9[b]). Counsel for defendant has submitted a letter indicating that the State takes no position with respect to the requested relief.

The Court has the power to waive this and other requirements contained in the Uniform Rules for the Court of Claims (22 NYCRR §206.1). Claimant, however, has failed to provide any compelling reason to relieve him from a responsibility that literally hundreds of other pro se litigants manage to meet. If, as he asserts, claimant is unable to pay for photocopies of what he anticipates will be "extensive motion papers to compel disclosure" (Mitchell affidavit, ¶ 4), he would be well-advised to address this problem by considering the far less burdensome alternative of simply attempting to communicate with defense counsel by letter. If motion practice becomes necessary, claimant has provided no reason for the Court to grant him special privileges that other litigants do not enjoy.

Claimant's motion is denied.







December 11, 2002

Albany, New York

HON. JUDITH A. HARD
Judge of the Court of Claims


The following papers were read on claimant's motion for an order waiving the requirement of 22 NYCRR §206.9(b) that motions be submitted on an original and two copies.

1. Notice of Motion and Supporting Affidavit of Dontie S. Mitchell, pro se

2. Letter of no position of Elyse J. Angelico, AAG

Filed papers: Claim; Answer