New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CARDEW v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-019-518, Claim No. 110054, Motion No. M-69757


Synopsis


Claimant's motion for an order compelling the State to respond to discovery and/or strike the State's answer and/or affirmative defenses is adjourned to allow State time to obtain documents.

Case Information

UID:
2005-019-518
Claimant(s):
ROBERT CARDEW
Claimant short name:
CARDEW
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
110054
Motion number(s):
M-69757
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Claimant's attorney:
ROBERT CARDEW, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERALBY: Carol A. Cocchiola, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
March 14, 2005
City:
Binghamton
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision

Claimant, an inmate appearing pro se, moves for an order compelling the defendant to answer his discovery demands and/or striking the defendant's answer and/or affirmative defenses for its failure to provide said discovery responses. The State of New York (hereinafter "State") opposes the motion.

This claim was filed with the Clerk of the Court on November 4, 2004. The State filed a Verified Answer on December 9, 2004. Thereafter, claimant served the attorney general with three discovery requests including a "Notice to Produce Names and Addresses of Witnesses and Expert Witnesses, and Other Disclosure" dated December 15, 2004; a "Notice of Demand to Answer Interrogatories and for Production of Documents for Inspection" dated December 27, 2004; and a second "Notice of Demand to Answer Interrogatories and for Production of Documents for Inspection" dated January 5, 2005. After receiving no response from the State to any of his discovery demands, claimant sent three letters to the State dated January 10, 2005, January 21, 2005, and January 31, 2005 demanding a response. In opposition, the State indicates that it sent claimant a letter dated February 11, 2005 requesting additional time to respond to the discovery demands, but that said letter must have crossed in the mail with claimant's motion which was filed on February 15, 2005. In any event, the State represents that it is in the process of obtaining the necessary information to respond to these demands and requests a 60-day adjournment of this motion.


The court finds no prejudice in granting the State's request for an adjournment of this matter. As such, the court will adjourn this motion until June 1, 2005 which should provide the parties ample time to resolve this matter. Both parties are directed to advise the court in writing before June 1, 2005 as to the progress of discovery and/or make whatever supplemental submissions, if any, to the court by that date that they deem necessary in order to address discovery issues that remain.


Accordingly, in view of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that Motion No. M-69757 is adjourned until June 1, 2005 in accordance with the foregoing.


March 14, 2005
Binghamton, New York

HON. FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Judge of the Court of Claims


The court has considered the following papers in connection with this motion:
  1. Claim, filed November 4, 2004.
  2. Verified Answer, filed December 9, 2004.
  3. Notice to Produce Names and Addresses of Witnesses and Expert Witnesses, and Other Disclosure, filed December 29, 2004.
  4. Notice of Demand to Answer Interrogatories and for Production of Documents for Inspection, filed January 10, 2005.
  5. Notice of Demand to Answer Interrogatories and for Production of Documents for Inspection, filed January 3, 2005.
  6. Notice of Motion No. M-69757, dated February 9, 2005, and filed February 15, 2005.
  7. Affidavit of Robert Cardew, in support of motion, sworn to February 9, 2005.
  8. Memorandum of Law in support of motion, dated February 9, 2005.
  9. Affirmation of Carol A. Cocchiola, AAG, in opposition to motion, dated March 2, 2005, and filed March 4, 2005, with attached exhibit.