New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

GARCIA v. THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK and NEW JERSEY, #2004-028-528, Claim No. 105191, Motion No. M-68006


Synopsis


Case Information

UID:
2004-028-528
Claimant(s):
DOROTHY GARCIA, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of ANDREW GARCIA, Jr.
Claimant short name:
GARCIA
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK and NEW JERSEY
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
105191
Motion number(s):
M-68006
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
RICHARD E. SISE
Claimant's attorney:
MITCHELL & HERZOG, ESQS.
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: Grace A. BranniganAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
April 28, 2004
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The following papers were read on the Court's motion, brought on by Order to Show Cause, for clarification from the parties regarding service of this claim.

1. Order to Show Cause, signed February 9, 2004 and filed on February 10, 2004

2. Affidavit of Catherine Naveed filed March 5, 2004 (Naveed Affidavit)

On November 9, 2001 a claim was filed with the Court by Claimant seeking damages arising from the national tragedy on September 11, 2001 as Claimant's Decedent was a passenger on one of the ill-fated airliners hijacked on that date. The Claim named as Defendnat the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

On February 9, 2004, a review of the files revealed that Defendant had never filed an Answer to the Claim and, consequently, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause directing both parties to provide statements relating to service of these claims. The Defendant has provided the affidavit of Catherine Naveed, which denies service of a Claim or a Notice of Intention on the Attorney General.

Court of Claims Act § 11 (a) provides, in relevant part, that a copy of the claim at issue "shall be served personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, upon the attorney general." The requirements set forth in Court of Claims Act § 11 are jurisdictional in nature and, as such, must be strictly construed (see Finnerty v New York State Thruway Auth., 75 NY2d 721, 722; Commack Self-Serv. Kosher Meats v State of New York, 270 AD2d 687).

The Court finds that Claimant failed to comply with the requirements of Court of Claims Act §11(a) in that she failed to serve a copy of the Claim on the Attorney General. Accordingly, Claim No. 105191 is hereby dismissed.


April 28, 2004
Albany, New York

HON. RICHARD E. SISE
Judge of the Court of Claims