New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

LAROCCO v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2006-016-049, Claim No. 111943, Motion No. M-71821


Synopsis


Motion for “reconsideration” was denied.

Case Information

UID:
2006-016-049
Claimant(s):
DOMINICK LAROCCO
Claimant short name:
LAROCCO
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
111943
Motion number(s):
M-71821
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant’s attorney:
Dominick Larocco, Pro se
Defendant’s attorney:
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney GeneralBy: Eva Hochman
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
August 10, 2006
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

This is Dominick Larocco’s motion for “reconsideration” of this Court’s previous Decision and Order, dated May 17, 2006, on Motion Nos. M-71341, M-71437 and M-71458. In such Decision and Order, claim no. 111943 was dismissed. Such claim alleged, inter alia, that Mr. Larocco was wrongfully convicted of attempted murder in the second degree after having been coerced into pleading guilty in 1997 by the trial judge. It will be assumed for the purposes of this Decision and Order that claimant is making a motion to reargue or renew pursuant to CPLR 2221. As for a motion to reargue, claimant has failed to show that any matters of fact or law were overlooked or misapprehended by the court. As for a motion to renew, claimant has failed to identify a change in the law or to offer new facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination.

For the foregoing reasons, having reviewed the parties’ submissions[1], IT IS ORDERED that motion no. M-71821 be denied.


August 10, 2006
New York, New York

HON. ALAN C. MARIN
Judge of the Court of Claims




  1. [1]The following were reviewed: claimant’s application, filed June 6, 2006, attaching “[Affirmation] for Reconsideration”; defendant’s affirmation in opposition with exhibits A through F; and claimant’s June 19, 2006 letter attaching a June 19, 2006 “Reply [Affirmation].”