New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

HUTCHINSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2004-030-590, Claim No. 105823, Motion No. M-69277


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2004-030-590
Claimant(s):
INEZ HUTCHINSON, as Administrator of the Estate of DEVON ROBERTS, aka DEVON DUFFUS, and SHARON ROBERTS
Claimant short name:
HUTCHINSON
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
105823
Motion number(s):
M-69277
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
THOMAS H. SCUCCIMARRA
Claimant's attorney:
WILSON, JONES & CAMPBELL, P.C.BY: DONNA A. CAMPBELL, ESQ.
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERALBY: DEWEY LEE, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
November 5, 2004
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The following papers numbered 1 to 5 were read and considered on Claimants' Motion

Number M-69277 to restore the claim to the calendar:
1,2 Notice of Motion, Attorney's Affirmation in Support of Motion to Restore by Donna A. Campbell, Counsel for Claimants and attached exhibits
  1. Letter from Dewey Lee, Assistant Attorney General dated October 18, 2004
4,5 Filed Papers: Claim Answer
After carefully considering the papers submitted[1] and the applicable law the motion is disposed of as follows:
This Claim had been dismissed by an Order filed on September 3, 2004 based upon Claimants' failure to prosecute, and after service of a demand to resume prosecution made upon Counsel for Claimants duly served on May 24, 2004 by certified mail, return receipt requested, pursuant to the provisions of Civil Practice Law and Rules §3216 (b) (3). Counsel for Claimants now states that settlement discussions had been ongoing, that her address changed and that perhaps the post office failed to forward mail, that another pending federal court action somehow stayed the prosecution of the action pending in this Court, and that the matter has indeed been settled. All of these statements reveal that Counsel has not familiarized herself with practice in the Court of Claims, when even the most cursory review of the Court of Claims Act, the Civil Practice Law and Rules, and the Uniform Trial Court Rules applicable in the Court of Claims [See 22 NYCRR §206.1], as well as common courtesy, would have revealed that the Court should be notified of any address changes, that any stipulations entered into by Counsel should be reduced to writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court, and that generally, the Court should be kept "in the loop."
Nonetheless, and in light of the Attorney General's lack of opposition to the relief requested herein, the lack of prejudice, and in recognition that Counsel is now aware that any Stipulation Discontinuing the Action shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court as required forthwith, it is hereby
ORDERED, that Motion Number M-69277 is hereby GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED, that Claim Number 105823 is hereby reinstated, and is restored to this Court's calendar of open and untried claims.

November 5, 2004
White Plains, New York

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




[1] The submission date on the motion has been moved forward in light of the lack of opposition to the relief requested by Counsel for the Defendant.