New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

PATTON v. STATE OF NEW YORK, #2006-018-540, Claim No. 106817, Motion No. M-71665


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2006-018-540
Claimant(s):
TIFFANY MICHELLE PATTON
Claimant short name:
PATTON
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
106817
Motion number(s):
M-71665
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Claimant’s attorney:
SIDNEY P. COMINSKY, LLCBy: JANET M. IZZO, ESQUIRE
Defendant’s attorney:
ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General of the State of New York
By: ROGER B. WILLIAMS, ESQUIREAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
November 30, 2006
City:
Syracuse
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant brings a motion to compel the production of documents demanded in a notice to

produce attached to Claimant’s motion papers as Exhibit A, and served upon Defendant on March 24, 2006. Claimant also requests that the bifurcated claim be rejoined (liability and damages) for trial and a new trial date be scheduled. The claim involves the alleged negligence of the State Department of Transportation (hereinafter DOT) in designing and maintaining New York State Route 370, also known as Onondaga Lake Parkway, which, according to Claimant proximately caused her accident and resultant injuries on December 30, 1999.

Defendant responds to Claimant’s request for production of the demanded discovery, asserting that specific difficulties have been encountered because the garage where many of the required documents are stored is contaminated by mold or other toxins. That garage is not accessible until further testing is completed. Defendant also responds that the “As Built” drawings for the Parkway have been provided. Other requests require further investigation to uncover who has the documents and where they are located.

Accordingly, after reviewing the submissions on this motion, the Court directs as follows:
  1. Any requests in Claimant's notice to produce dated March 24,
2006, which do not specify a time-frame shall be deemed to seek documents from 1995 - 2000. If Claimant needs additional documents outside of that time-frame, once Defendant responds, a new demand shall be made specifying the new time frame and documents needed;

  1. All documents demanded and not yet provided shall be provided by January 31, 2007. If, by that date, Defendant still cannot gain access
to the documents located at “Yeager’s Garage,” Defendant shall provide by that same date, an affidavit from an appropriate DOT representative regarding the accessibility status and a date when the records may be obtained;

  1. A status conference will be held on the record on this matter on February
8, 2007, at 9:30 a.m., and counsel are expected to be present.


Claimant’s request for liability and damages to be tried together is DENIED at this time.




November 30, 2006
Syracuse, New York

HON. DIANE L. FITZPATRICK
Judge of the Court of Claims


The Court has considered the following documents in deciding this motion:


Notice of Motion....................................................................................................1

Affidavit of Janet M. Izzo, Esquire, in support with exhibit attached thereto........2


Affirmation of Roger B. Williams, Esquire, Assistant Attorney General,

in opposition................................................................................................3