New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CAMPBELL v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK , #2005-028-533, Claim No. NONE, Motion No. M-69866


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2005-028-533
Claimant(s):
TASHA CAMPBELL a/k/a BERNICE KEYES
Claimant short name:
CAMPBELL
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
NONE
Motion number(s):
M-69866
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
RICHARD E. SISE
Claimant's attorney:
TASHA CAMPBELL, pro se
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
June 21, 2005
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

In reaching its decision on the instant application, the Court has read and considered the following papers:

(1) Motion for Permission to File a Late Claim, dated February 10, 2005 and filed on February 24, 2005.

Applications to file late claims are governed by Court of Claims Act §10(6). It provides as follows:
In determining whether to permit the filing of a claim pursuant to this subdivision, the court shall consider, among other factors, whether the delay in filing the claim was excusable; whether the state had notice of the essential facts constituting the claim; whether the state had an opportunity to investigate the circumstances underlying the claim; whether the claim appears to be meritorious; whether the failure to file or serve upon the attorney general a timely claim or to serve upon the attorney general a notice of intention resulted in substantial prejudice to the state, and whether the claimant has any other available remedy.

Court of Claims Act §10(6)

After reviewing the Claimant's papers, the Court finds that the Claimant failed to annex a copy of the proposed claim to her application (Court of Claims Act § 10[6]).

However, more importantly, her papers reveal that the gravamen of her claim relates to her confinement at Riker's Island – a New York City institution (see Court of Claims Act, §9).

Accordingly, based upon the Claimant's failure to comply with the statute, the existence of an alternate remedy and the lack of merit to the alleged claim, the Court denies the application.



June 21, 2005
Albany, New York

HON. RICHARD E. SISE
Judge of the Court of Claims