New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

SALDANA v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2003-030-542, Claim No. 103172, Motion No. M-66483


Synopsis


Pro se inmate's motion to compel production of documents and for sanctions denied.

Case Information

UID:
2003-030-542
Claimant(s):
JUAN SALDANA
Claimant short name:
SALDANA
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
103172
Motion number(s):
M-66483
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
THOMAS H. SCUCCIMARRA
Claimant's attorney:
JUAN SALDANA, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERALBY: DEWEY LEE, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
May 21, 2003
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The following papers, numbered 1 to 6, were considered on Claimant's


motion to compel and for sanctions pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules §§3124 and 3126:

1,2 Notice of Motion, Affidavit in Support by Claimant sworn to February 27, 2003 and accompanying exhibit

  1. Affirmation in Opposition by Dewey Lee, Assistant Attorney General, dated April 29, 2003
  1. Affirmation (sic) in Opposition to Defendant's Opposition by Claimant sworn to May 6, 2003
5,6 Filed Papers: Claim, Answer.

After carefully reviewing the papers submitted and the applicable law, the motion is disposed of as follows:

Juan Saldana, the Claimant herein, alleges in Claim Number 103172 that he was assaulted and battered by three correction officers at Green Haven Correctional Facility (hereafter Green Haven) on July 28, 2000. While in camera review of documents provided by the Inspector General was underway,[1] Claimant served this motion to compel responses to a Discovery Demand sent to Defendant in or about December, 2002.

The Demand asks for Claimant's statement purportedly given to the area Sergeant working the 3 to 11 shift on July 28, 2000; the name of the Sergeant working and assigned to the clinic area on that date and at that time; and all entries made into the log book in the clinic area on July 28, 2000 pertinent to Claimant's assault allegations. Additionally, he asks for the current assignment of Sergeant Richard Ward.

In Response, Defendant indicates that there is no record of Claimant's having made a statement to the area Sergeant; the name of the Sergeant assigned is Richard Ward; and the log book cannot be located. Defendant does not provide the current assignment of Sergeant Ward.

While Claimant takes issue with the responses given, he does not indicate on what basis he finds them less than credible. These are appropriate responses to the disclosure request and therefore, the application herein is largely moot. Defendant did not, however, respond to Claimant's request for Sergeant Ward's current assignment. With respect to that request, therefore, Defendant is directed to respond, in writing, within twenty (20) days of the filing date of this Decision, or indicate why a response cannot be had .

Accordingly, Claimant's motion to compel production of documents and for sanctions is denied in part and granted in part. §§3124, 3126 Civil Practice Law and Rules.

So Ordered.

May 21, 2003
White Plains, New York

HON. THOMAS H. SCUCCIMARRA
Judge of the Court of Claims




[1] See, Saldana v State of New York, Claim No. 103172, Motion No. M-65471 (Waldon, J., October 25, 2002).