New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

MONTI v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-033-135, Claim No. None, Motion No. M-69948


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2005-033-135
Claimant(s):
MERYL MONTI
Claimant short name:
MONTI
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-69948
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
James J. Lack
Claimant’s attorney:
Edelman, Goldstein, Green & Bashner, P.C.By: Rhonda Katz, Esq.
Defendant’s attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, New York State Attorney GeneralBy: Todd A. Schall, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
September 1, 2005
City:
Hauppauge
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

This is a motion by Meryl Monti (hereinafter “movant”) for permission to enlarge the time to file a late claim pursuant to Court of Claims Act §10(6)[1]. Movant previously filed a motion to file a late claim (M-68732). The motion was granted and the Decision and Order was filed on December 16, 2004. The prior decision granted movant 45 days from the filing date of the Decision and Order to serve and file a claim. Movant asserts that she never received the Decision and Order from the Court prior to the expiration of the 45 day deadline.

Movant asks this Court to enlarge the time to file the late claim. Defendant opposes the motion.

Given that the motion was decided and the Decision and Order was filed and mailed during one of the busiest mail times of the year, the Court will accept movant’s explanation of not having timely received the Court’s Decision and Order.

Based upon the foregoing, the Court grants movant’s motion and directs movant to serve and file the proposed claim pursuant to Court of Claims Act §§10, 11 and 11-a within forty-five (45) days of the filing of this Decision and Order.


September 1, 2005
Hauppauge, New York

HON. JAMES J. LACK
Judge of the Court of Claims




[1].The following papers have been read and considered on movant’s motion: Notice of Motion dated March 25, 2005 and filed March 31, 2005; Affirmation in Support of Motion of Rhonda Katz, Esq. with annexed Exhibits 1-4 dated March 25, 2005 and filed March 31, 2005; Affirmation in Opposition of Todd A. Schall, Esq. dated May 11, 2005 and filed May 13, 2005; Reply Affirmation in Further Support of Motion of Rhonda Katz, Esq. dated June 6, 2005 and filed June 13, 2005.