New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

GONZALES a/k/a MORALES v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-019-578, Claim No. 110725, Motion No. M-70789


Synopsis


Claimant's motion to compel discovery is denied as moot.

Case Information

UID:
2005-019-578
Claimant(s):
RAYMOND GONZALEZ, a/k/a RAYMOND MORALES
Claimant short name:
GONZALES a/k/a MORALES
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
110725
Motion number(s):
M-70789
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Claimant's attorney:
RAYMOND GONZALEZ, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERALBY: Geoffrey B. Rossi, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
November 9, 2005
City:
Binghamton
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant, an inmate appearing pro se, moves to compel discovery responses from the defendant. The State of New York (hereinafter "State") opposes the motion.

This claim alleges that claimant was assaulted by an unknown inmate at Elmira Correctional Facility on December 21, 2003. By way of this motion, claimant alleges that the State has failed to respond to his prior discovery demand dated June 20, 2005 and amended discovery demand dated September 7, 2005, as well as good faith letters dated August 3, 2005 and August 29, 2005.


In response, the State concedes a delay in responding thereto, but indicates that it has mailed discovery responses to claimant on November 1, 2005 while also responding to this motion.


The court does not condone the State's failure to timely respond to claimant's discovery demands or, at a minimum, communicate to claimant that it would be delayed in doing so. Nevertheless, the court finds no prejudice to claimant resulting from the State's delay in responding to his discovery demands since this matter is not yet scheduled for trial. In view of the foregoing, claimant's motion to compel discovery will be denied as moot.


In view of the foregoing, it is ORDERED, that claimant's motion, Motion No. M-70789, is DENIED AS MOOT.


November 9, 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 April 4, 2005.
  2. Verified Answer, filed May 12, 2005.
  3. Notice for Discovery and Inspection, filed June 29, 2005.
  4. Amendment of Notice of Discovery and Inspection, filed September 12, 2005.
  5. Notice of Motion No. M-70789, sworn to September 30, 2005, and filed October 5, 2005.
  6. Affidavit of Raymond Gonzalez, in support of motion, sworn to September 30, 2005.
  7. Affirmation of Geoffrey B. Rossi, AAG, in opposition to motion, dated November 1, 2005, and filed November 3, 2005, with attached exhibit.