New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

VELEZ v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2003-016-043, Claim No. 104253, Motion No. M-65425


Synopsis


Inmate discovery motion was denied.

Case Information

UID:
2003-016-043
Claimant(s):
JOHN VELEZ
Claimant short name:
VELEZ
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
104253
Motion number(s):
M-65425
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant's attorney:
John Velez
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: James E. Shoemaker, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
June 13, 2003
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

This is John Velez' motion to compel defendant to produce documents responsive to his "Notice for Disclosure." Specifically, claimant seeks: (a) his package list file for the period of April 1, 1999 through May 5, 1999; (b) his dental file for the period of January 1, 1999 through May 5, 1999; (c) his April 30, 1999 "2064 form"; and (d) his May 10, 1999 "2064 form." In his underlying claim as filed, Mr. Velez asserted that defendant was negligent in allowing other inmates to assault him on May 5, 1999 at Sullivan Correctional Facility, as well as in connection with the loss of items of his personal property following the assault. In a Decision and Order filed on December 18, 2001, that portion of Velez' claim relating to the assault was dismissed as untimely; only the lost property portion of the claim remains.

Defendant asserts that prior to making this motion to compel, claimant did not serve his discovery demand on defendant and defendant thus treated this motion as a discovery demand and served a response on claimant, a copy of which is annexed to defendant's papers. Defendant has produced all requested documents except for the dental file, which defendant notes relates to the portion of the claim dismissed in the previous Decision and Order.

In view of the foregoing, having reviewed the submissions, [1] IT IS ORDERED that motion no. M65425 be denied.


June 13, 2003
New York, New York

HON. ALAN C. MARIN
Judge of the Court of Claims




  1. [1]The following were reviewed: claimant's notice of motion with affidavit in support; and defendant's March 6, 2003 letter with attached "Response to Claimant's Discovery Demands."