New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CHRISTIAN v. MEDGAR EVERS COLLEGE, OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, #2004-016-036, Claim No. 109023, Motion No. M-68325


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2004-016-036
Claimant(s):
ELMO CHRISTIAN
Claimant short name:
CHRISTIAN
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
MEDGAR EVERS COLLEGE, OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
109023
Motion number(s):
M-68325
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant's attorney:
Elmo Christian
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Grace A. Brannigan, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
July 7, 2004
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

This is defendant's motion to dismiss the claim of Elmo Christian on the grounds that it was served on the Office of the Attorney General more than 90 days after accrual and was not served on the City University of New York. In his underling claim, Mr. Christian alleges that on December 12, 2003, persons including Medgar Evers College staff members removed items of personal property from his home, using a vehicle owned by the college. The claim was served on the Office of the Attorney General on March 12, 2004. See ¶5 of the April 14, 2004 affirmation of Grace A. Brannigan (the "Brannigan Aff.") and exhibit A thereto. Section 10.3 of the Court of Claims Act requires service within 90 days of accrual. March 12, 2004 is 91 days after December 12, 2003, and service was thus untimely for the purposes of the Act.

"It is well established that compliance with sections 10 and 11 of the Court of Claims Act pertaining to the timeliness of filing and service requirements respecting claims and notices of intention to file claims constitutes a jurisdictional prerequisite to the institution and maintenance of a claim against the State, and accordingly, must be strictly construed . . ." Byrne v State of New York, 104 AD2d 782, 783, 480 NYS2d 225, 227 (2d Dept 1984), lv denied, 64 NY2d 607, 488 NYS2d 1023 (1985) (citations omitted). See also Mallory v State of New York, 196 AD2d 925, 601 NYS2d 972 (3d Dept 1993).

In sum, this Court lacks jurisdiction over Elmo Christian's claim and the remaining ground for defendant's motion need not be reached. Accordingly, having reviewed the submissions[1], IT IS ORDERED that motion no. M-68325 be granted and claim no. 109023 be dismissed.

July 7, 2004
New York, New York

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




  1. [1]The following were reviewed: defendant's notice of motion with affirmation in support and exhibits A and B; and claimant's "Response Answer to Untimely Service Motion Claim and Complaints Case Brief to Proceed" with exhibits A-D.