New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

SANDSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2004-015-392, Claim No. 106502, Motion No. M-67797


Case Information

Claimant short name:
Footnote (claimant name) :

Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
Motion number(s):
Cross-motion number(s):

Claimant's attorney:
Andrew Sandson, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney:
Honorable Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General
By: Belinda A. Wagner, EsquireAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
March 30, 2004
Saratoga Springs

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Claimant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3126 for an order deeming all outstanding discovery issues resolved in his favor is denied. Claimant's application for sanctions against defense counsel for frivolous conduct pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 130-1 or alternatively for an order finding defense counsel guilty of contempt is also denied. The instant claim filed on August 14, 2002 seeks damages for personal injuries allegedly arising from the negligent denial of prescribed medical treatment by the Department of Correctional Services (DOCS). Specifically, claimant alleges that DOCS repeatedly denied his requests for medication ("Pegitron & Ribavarin") allegedly prescribed by a DOCS' physician in June 2001 for treatment of hepatitis C.

Claimant previously moved for an order sanctioning the defendant for its failure to verify responses to claimant's First Demand for Admissions[1] and for failure to respond to claimant's Second Demand for Admissions. In response to that motion defendant moved for a protective order pursuant to CPLR 3103 directed toward a Third Demand for Admissions dated August 16, 2003. By decision and order dated December 18, 2003 (filed January 7, 2004) the Court denied the claimant's motion and granted the State's motion for a protective order vacating claimant's Third Demand for Admissions.

While the aforementioned motions were pending claimant filed the instant motion seeking monetary sanctions against the defendant pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 130-1 for alleged frivolous conduct in failing to adequately respond to his notices to admit and in moving for a protective order; and further deeming outstanding discovery issues resolved in claimant's favor pursuant to CPLR 3126 (1). Alternatively claimant seeks an order adjudging defense counsel to be guilty of contempt. The defendant opposed the motion.

The impropriety of claimant's first and second demands for admissions were adequately addressed in the Court's December 18, 2003 decision and order and need not be repeated here. The Court therein likewise considered and rejected claimant's request to impose monetary sanctions for the defendant's allegedly frivolous conduct. In granting the State's motion for a protective order the Court found that claimant's Third Demand for Admissions, issued after repeated warnings by defense counsel to the pro se claimant regarding the proper use of that particular form of discovery, should be vacated. Currently, there are no outstanding discovery devices which require a response from the defendant. As a result, there exists no basis for relief under CPLR 3126 or to support a finding of frivolous conduct justifying the imposition of sanctions. Moreover on this record there is nothing which would support a finding of contempt on the part of the defendant.

Accordingly, the claimant's motion is denied in all respects.

March 30, 2004
Saratoga Springs, New York

Judge of the Court of Claims

The Court considered the following papers:
  1. Notice of motion dated December 6, 2003;
  2. Affidavit of Andrew Sandson sworn to December 6, 2003;
  3. Affirmation of Belinda A. Wagner dated January 14, 2004 with exhibit.

[1]Treated as a notice to admit (see, CPLR § 3123[a]).