New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

KAIRIS v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2006-041-008, Claim No. 111697, Motion No. M-72201


Synopsis


Statement of trial readiness filed by pro se inmate claimant is stricken since the Rules for the Court of Claims do not require the filing of a note of issue and certificate of readiness in such cases and further, because discovery is not complete.

Case Information

UID:
2006-041-008
Claimant(s):
PAUL KAIRIS
Claimant short name:
KAIRIS
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
111697
Motion number(s):
M-72201
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FRANK P. MILANO
Claimant’s attorney:
Paul KairisPro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Hon. Eliot Spitzer, New York State Attorney GeneralBy: Kathleen M. Arnold, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
October 4, 2006
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision


Defendant moves to strike the claimant’s statement of trial readiness on the grounds that the Uniform Rules for the Court of Claims (Rules) provide that a note of issue and certificate of readiness are not required for prisoner pro se claims; the statement of trial readiness filed and served by claimant is not in the form prescribed by the Rules; and because discovery is not yet complete since claimant has not responded to defendant’s demand for production of documents. The amended claim was served on February 15, 2006 and filed the following day. Claimant alleges that defendant negligently lost certain items of claimant’s personal property while claimant was being transferred from the general inmate population at Clinton Correctional Facility to the special housing unit at Upstate Correctional Facility.

Defendant served an answer on March 24, 2006 and a demand for production of documents on August 17, 2006.

In response to defendant’s motion, claimant provides a letter stating, among other things, that he has now answered defendant’s demand for production of documents. Claimant thus concedes that discovery was not complete at the time the statement of trial readiness was filed.

Claimant also concedes that § 206.12(a) of the Rules dispenses with the need for the filing of a note of issue and certificate of readiness in prisoner pro se claims.

Based upon the foregoing, the Court orders that claimant’s statement of trial readiness be stricken. Accordingly, the Court need not determine whether the statement of trial readiness is substantially “in the form prescribed” by § 206.12 of the Rules.

With respect to claimant's assertion that the claim is “trial ready,” § 206.13 of the Rules provides that the scheduling of the trial of a prisoner pro se claim lies within the discretion of the Presiding Judge and “this matter, as with all claims, will be scheduled as soon as practicable” (Velez v State of New York, [Ct Cl, Lebous, J., #2005-019-579])[1].

Defendant’s motion is granted and the statement of trial readiness is stricken.



October 4, 2006
Albany, New York

HON. FRANK P. MILANO
Judge of the Court of Claims


Papers Considered:

  1. Defendant’s Notice of Motion, filed August 28, 2006;
  1. Affirmation of Kathleen M. Arnold, affirmed on August 28, 2006, with annexed exhibits;
  1. Letter of claimant, received September 19, 2006.

[1].
This and other decisions of the Court of Claims may be found at the Court's website: www.nyscourtofclaims.state.ny.us.