New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

SIME v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2004-031-112, Claim No. 106553, Motion No. M-68978


Synopsis


Defendant's motion to compel disclosure is granted

Case Information

UID:
2004-031-112
Claimant(s):
ALEX SIME
Claimant short name:
SIME
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
106553
Motion number(s):
M-68978
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
RENÉE FORGENSI MINARIK
Claimant's attorney:
ALEX SIME, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
New York State Attorney General
BY: HEATHER R. RUBINSTEIN, ESQ.Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
September 10, 2004
City:
Rochester
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)

.
Decision

The following papers were read on motion by Defendant for an order compelling disclosure from Claimant pursuant to CPLR 3124, or to penalize Claimant for his failure to comply with disclosure demands pursuant to CPLR 3126:
1) Defendant's Notice of Motion, filed August 16, 2004;
2) Affirmation of Heather R. Rubinstein, Esq., dated August 12, 2004;
3) Claimant's unsworn response, dated August 13, 2004. Defendant brings this motion to compel Claimant to respond to Defendant's interrogatories, which were served upon Claimant on October 3, 2002. In the alternative, Defendant requests that Claimant be precluded from offering evidence at the trial of this claim relating to the demanded information. The trial is currently scheduled for September 24, 2004.

Claimant does not dispute that he failed to respond to Defendant's demands, but argues that he notified the Court Clerk in October of 2002 that his legal papers were lost during a transfer between facilities and requested copies of the demands underlying this motion. While it may be argued that Claimant should have contacted Defendant in this regard, it also appears that Defendant has not previously attempted to resolve this dispute by direct correspondence to Claimant.

For this reason, I find that the interests of justice are best served by adjourning the trial scheduled for September 24, 2004 and affording Claimant a limited opportunity to comply with Defendant's demands.

Accordingly, based upon the papers submitted with this motion, it is

ORDERED, that Motion No. M-68978 is GRANTED as follows:

1) Defendant shall forward to Claimant a copy of its First Set of Interrogatories originally served on October 3, 2002;

2) Claimant is hereby compelled and directed to respond fully to these interrogatories within 30 days of service of the demands upon him by Defendant;

3) In the event Claimant fails to respond to the interrogatories within 30 days as directed above, Claimant shall be precluded from offering any evidence or testimony at trial which relates to the information requested in the interrogatories; and

4) The trial of this claim, which had been scheduled for September 24, 2004, is hereby adjourned.

September 10, 2004
Rochester, New York

HON. RENÉE FORGENSI MINARIK
Judge of the Court of Claims