New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

DAVIDSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2004-015-391, Claim No. 108063, Motion No. M-67807


Synopsis


Case Information

UID:
2004-015-391
Claimant(s):
CHESTER DAVIDSON
Claimant short name:
DAVIDSON
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
108063
Motion number(s):
M-67807
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Claimant's attorney:
Chester Davidson, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Honorable Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
By: Michael W. Friedman, EsquireAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
March 26, 2004
City:
Saratoga Springs
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant's motion seeking an order pursuant to CPLR 6301 and 6311 granting a preliminary injunction against the New York State Division of Parole is denied. The underlying claim seeks to recover damages allegedly arising from the denial of parole on several occasions between February 1998 and December 2001. The claim alleges numerous and varied violations of the New York State Constitution and the United States Constitution as well as violations of unspecified statutes, by-laws (sic), rules and regulations.

It appears from paragraph 13 and the wherefore clause of claimant's affidavit in support of the instant motion that claimant is seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the Division of Parole from threatening claimant with a violation of parole and enjoining the division from violating his parole following his anticipated release from State custody. Claimant requests that the preliminary injunction remain in effect for the entire period during which the instant case is pending.

The defendant has opposed the motion on the grounds that this Court lacks jurisdiction to issue a preliminary injunction and that neither the State of New York nor the Division of Parole have been shown to have proceeded in an improper or retaliatory manner against the claimant nor have they threatened to take such action.

The jurisdiction of the Court of Claims is "limited to actions seeking money damages against the State in appropriation, contract or tort" and does not include "strictly equitable relief . . . with the return of the money to follow as a consequence of the equitable relief, if granted" (Psaty v Duryea, 306 NY 413, 416-417; Ozanam Hall of Queens Nursing Home v State of New York, 241 AD2d 670). This Court's limited jurisdiction does not include the authority to issue a preliminary injunction (see Johnson v State of New York, Ct Cl, January 29, 2004 [Claim No. 107834, Motion No. M-67809] Lebous, J. UID # 2004-019-510, unreported; Brooks v State of New York, Ct Cl, March 20, 2003 [Claim No. 106230, Motion No. M-66017] Sise, J., UID # 2003-028-520, unreported; see also Moreno v State of New York, Ct Cl, August 26, 2002 [Claim No. 105535, Motion No. M-65214] McNamara, J., UID # 2002-011-574, unreported).

Claimant's motion must be and hereby is denied on the basis that the Court does not possess jurisdiction to provide the equitable relief requested.


March 26, 2004
Saratoga Springs, New York

HON. FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims



The Court considered the following papers:
  1. Notice of motion dated December 17, 2003;
  2. Affidavit of Chester Davidson sworn to December 19, 2003 with exhibits;
  3. Affirmation of Michael W. Friedman dated January 14, 2004 with exhibit.