New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

RUSSING v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2007-016-013, Claim No. 113181, Motion Nos. M-73088, M-73139


Synopsis


Claim was dismissed as notice of intention was improperly served by regular mail.

Case Information

UID:
2007-016-013
Claimant(s):
GEORGE RUSSING
Claimant short name:
RUSSING
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
113181
Motion number(s):
M-73088, M-73139
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant’s attorney:
George Russing, Pro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney GeneralBy: Roberto Barbosa, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
April 18, 2007
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

In his claim, George Russing alleges that because of defendant’s negligence, he was injured while playing baseball at Sullivan Correctional Facility on September 11, 2006. Defendant moves to dismiss on the ground that Mr. Russing’s notice of intention was improperly served by regular mail. For his part, claimant moves for an order “dismissing the defendant’s verified answer and motion to dismiss.”

Claimant does not dispute that he served his notice of intention by regular mail on October 23, 2006.[1] Section 11.a of the Court of Claims Act provides that a notice of intention must be served on the Attorney General either personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested. Regular mail is not an authorized method of service and its use is insufficient to obtain jurisdiction. See, e.g., Philippe v State of New York, 248 AD2d 827, 669 NYS2d 759 (3d Dept 1998). The Court thus lacks jurisdiction over Russing’s claim.

Accordingly, having reviewed the submissions,[2] it is ordered that motion no. M-73088 be granted, that motion no. M-73139 be denied and that claim no. 113181 be dismissed.


April 18, 2007
New York, New York

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




  1. [1]Claimant subsequently served and filed his claim on January 8, 2007. It is unclear from the submissions how such claim was served, but in any event, such claim was served and filed more than 90 days after the September 11, 2006 accrual date in this case.
  2. [2]The Court reviewed: defendant’s notice of motion no. M-73088 with affirmation in support and exhibits A through C; and claimant’s notice of motion no. M-73139 with affidavit in support.