New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

BROCK v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2003-005-513, Claim No. 103520, Motion No. M-66492


Synopsis


Claimant's attorney's motion for permission to withdraw as attorney of record is granted to the extent noted.

Case Information

UID:
2003-005-513
Claimant(s):
VINCENT BROCK
Claimant short name:
BROCK
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
103520
Motion number(s):
M-66492
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
DONALD J. CORBETT, JR.
Claimant's attorney:
Matusick, Spadafora & VerrastroBy: Richard E. Updegrove, Esq.
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: James L. Gelormini, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 7, 2003
City:
Rochester
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision


On April 16, 2003, the following papers, numbered 1 to 4, were read on motion by Claimant's counsel for permission to withdraw as attorney of record:

1, 2 Order to Show Cause and Affidavit and Exhibits Annexed
  1. Claimant's "Answer" to Order to Show Cause and Exhibits Annexed
  2. Filed Papers: Claim
Upon the foregoing papers, this motion is granted to the extent noted.

By Order to Show Cause, Claimant's Counsel seeks permission to withdraw as attorney of record pursuant to CPLR 321 (b)(2). Proof of timely and proper service of the application has been provided. The Defendant has not taken a position with respect to the relief sought.

Claimant has supplied an extensive response to the motion, reciting his experiences and concerns about Counsel's law firm and certain attorneys within said firm, including continuing concerns about the alleged neglect and lack of zealous representation of his claim by Counsel's law firm. It appears to me that the Claimant, who has previously discharged the same firm from its representation of him in a related federal action, no longer desires to be represented by Counsel's law firm. I do not make the finding, as requested by Claimant, that Counsel's law firm is "unfit." I also have no authority to appoint other counsel (see, Matter of Smiley, 36 NY2d 433). Thus, to the extent that the motion seeks to relieve Counsel and his law firm as attorneys of record, it is granted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Claimant's Counsel is permitted to withdraw as attorney of record in the claim herein pursuant to CPLR 321(b), upon service of a file-stamped copy of this order upon the Claimant by regular first class mail and certified mail, return receipt requested, at his last known address, and upon the Defendant by regular mail; and

2. Claimant shall, within 45 days of service upon him of a file-stamped copy of this order, notify the Clerk of the Court and the Defendant in writing of his intention to proceed pro se, or have filed a notice of appearance by his new attorney; and

3. If Claimant fails to appear pro se or by his attorney within the said 45-day period, the claim herein will be deemed dismissed for his default (22 NYCRR 206.15), and no further order of this Court will be required. In the event that Claimant advises that he intends to proceed pro se, the Clerk shall transfer this matter to the appropriate prisoner pro se calendar.

4. Claimant's counsel shall file affidavits(s) of service of this order with the Clerk of the Court.


May 7, 2003
Rochester, New York

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