New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CRAGGAN AND HAHN v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2006-032-510, Claim No. 105870


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2006-032-510
Claimant(s):
JAMES CRAGGAN AND GOLDIE HAHN
1 1.There are no allegations with respect to this claimant. As such, all references to claimant shall refer to claimant James Craggan.
Claimant short name:
CRAGGAN AND HAHN
Footnote (claimant name) :
There are no allegations with respect to this claimant. As such, all references to claimant shall refer to claimant James Craggan.
Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
105870
Motion number(s):

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
JUDITH A. HARD
Claimant’s attorney:
James Craggan, Pro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Hon. Eliot Spitzer, NYS Attorney GeneralBy: Frederick H. McGown, III, Assistant Attorney General, Of Counsel
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
August 9, 2006
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision
Claimant filed this claim on April 8, 2002, alleging that he was placed in keeplock for three days without justification. He states that on December 4, 2001, a nurse administrator at Clinton Correctional Facility placed him in keeplock in retaliation for making a complaint. Claimant states that he was in a waiting room of the facility hospital and that he refused to be interviewed by the nurse. The nurse then asked claimant if he wrote a complaint about the nurse. Claimant answered yes, and the nurse told claimant that he was placing him on keeplock pending a misbehavior report. Claimant amended his complaint against the nurse to include this incident. Claimant's grievance was closed after a finding that he was no longer interested in pursing it, although claimant disagrees with this finding. Although claimant was originally told that no misbehavior report was filed, later he was told on January 2, 2002 that, although it was filed, ultimately the misbehavior report was dismissed. Claimant states that he exhausted his administrative remedies on January 23, 2002.
Based on the evidence submitted, the Court finds that the nurse wrote a misbehavior report for claimant's refusal to be interviewed in the nurse's office, and claimant was placed in keeplock pending resolution of the misbehavior report (7 NYCRR part 250). The Court also finds that the report was ultimately dismissed, destroyed pursuant to departmental procedure, and claimant was released, all within a 72 hour period. Given that there is no evidence that defendant exceeded "the scope of their authority or violate[d] [7 NYCRR Part 250], the State has absolute immunity for those actions" (Holloway v State of New York, 285 AD2d 765, 765 [3d Dept 2001]). Accordingly, the claim is dismissed.
Let judgment be entered accordingly.


August 9, 2006
Albany, New York

HON. JUDITH A. HARD
Judge of the Court of Claims