New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

RICHARDSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-010-042, Claim No. 110727, Motion Nos. M-70042, CM-70259


Synopsis


Defendant's cross-motion to dismiss the claim was granted as the claim was served untimely and by regular mail. Claimant's motion for permission to proceed as a poor person is moot.

Case Information

UID:
2005-010-042
Claimant(s):
WATKINS RICHARDSON
Claimant short name:
RICHARDSON
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
110727
Motion number(s):
M-70042
Cross-motion number(s):
CM-70259
Judge:
Terry Jane Ruderman
Claimant's attorney:
WATKINS RICHARDSONPro Se
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General for the State of New YorkBy: Dewey Lee, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
July 26, 2005
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The following papers numbered 1-3 were read and considered by the Court on claimant's motion for permission to proceed as a poor person and defendant's cross-motion to dismiss the claim:
Notice of Motion, Petition, Claimant's Affidavit......................................................1

Letter From the Orange County Attorney's Office Taking No Position on the Motion......................................................................................................................2

Notice of Cross-Motion, Attorney's Supporting Affirmation and Exhibits.............3

To the extent that the claim states a claim for negligence against the State based upon claimant contracting hepatitis, the accrual date is November 12, 2004 and the claim was served by regular mail on May 11, 2005. Accordingly, the Court finds that the claim was neither timely nor properly served pursuant to the mandates of the Court of Claims Act. The provisions of Court of Claims Act §§ 10 and 11 are to be strictly construed and failure to comply with the service provisions "is a jurisdictional defect compelling the dismissal of the claim" (Welch v State of New York, 286 AD2d 496, 497-98).

Accordingly, defendant's cross-motion to dismiss is GRANTED and claimant's motion for poor person status is DENIED as moot.


July 26, 2005
White Plains, New York

HON. TERRY JANE RUDERMAN
Judge of the Court of Claims