New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

ROBERTS v. THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, #2004-030-930, Claim No. None, Motion No. M-67966


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2004-030-930
Claimant(s):
DENISE ROBERTS
Claimant short name:
ROBERTS
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
None
Motion number(s):
M-67966
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
THOMAS H. SCUCCIMARRA
Claimant's attorney:
Jeffrey Schwartz, Esq.
Defendant's attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney Generalby Grace A. Brannigan
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
September 28, 2004
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The court read and considered the following papers on claimant's motion for permission to file a late claim: Notice of Motion, Affirmation and Exhibits, Affirmation in Opposition and Exhibits, Proposed Claim received June 21, 2004, Affirmation in Opposition and Exhibit.

In an interim order filed on this motion on June 2, 2004, the court wrote:
Claimant's prior application was denied without prejudice as the result of the insufficiency of the submitted papers, including an inadequate proposed claim and the lack of an affidavit from the claimant. Although claimant has now submitted an affidavit, the proposed claim is still inadequate.
The court adjourned the motion with instructions to claimant to submit a "proper proposed claim," which claimant has now done.

Defendant argues that the new proposed claim is deficient in two respects: (1) that it fails to adequately state claimant's injuries and (2) that it fails to state counsel's name and address.

The proposed claim alleges that claimant suffered personal injuries amounting to $5,000.00 in medical and hospital expenses, $5,000.00 in lost wages and $90,000.00 in pain and suffering. Such is sufficient at this stage in the litigation, and defendant has pointed to no authority that the Court of Claims Act or the Uniform Rules for the Court of Claims require more. The attorney's name and address may be added before the claim is served and filed.

The papers before the court indicate that defendant had timely notice of the relevant facts as well as the timely opportunity to investigate and that no prejudice would result from an order allowing late filing. The papers also demonstrate a sufficient appearance of merit so that claimant should be afforded the opportunity to litigate her claim on the merits (Matter of Santana v New York State Thruway Auth., 92 Misc 2d 1).

Accordingly, the motion is granted. Claimant may serve and file her claim, with the addition of her attorney's name and address, within 45 days of the filing date of this order, such claim to consist of the amended claim currently before the court with the addition of counsel's name and address.

September 28, 2004
White Plains, New York

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