In motion no. M-73711, claimant Carl D. Wells moves for an order compelling
discovery. In motion no. M-73712, defendant moves to dismiss the claim, in
which Mr. Wells complains of his treatment while incarcerated on Rikers Island.
Claimant also alleges that a judge sitting in Bronx County wrongly signed an
order to produce him, and that an assistant district attorney acted wrongfully
in requesting his production and in attempting to obtain his
fingerprints. Rikers Island is a facility of the Department of Correction of the
City of New York, not the State of New York. See The Green Book, The
Official Directory of the City of New York (2005-2006 edition at p. 103).
The Court of Claims has no jurisdiction over the City of New York, and thus as
far as Wells’ alleged mistreatment at Rikers Island, this Court lacks
jurisdiction over his claim.
With regard to the judge having signed an order to produce claimant, even
assuming such was in error, it is well settled that judicial immunity bars
claims against the State of New York for errors made by its judges. So long as
there was subject matter jurisdiction, this immunity is absolute, even where the
judge’s actions were malicious. See, e.g., Murray v Brancato, 290
NY 52 (1943); Rosenstein v State of New York, 37 AD3d 208, 829 NYS2d 93
(1st Dept 2007).
Finally, as to the assistant district attorney, the State is not liable for her
actions as she is not an officer or employee of the State. See, e.g., Pettus
v State of New York
, Ct Cl, December 7, 2006 (unreported, claim no. 112425,
motion no. M-72133, cross-motion no. CM-72320, Collins, J., UID
Accordingly, having reviewed the submissions
IT IS ORDERED that motion no. M-73711 be denied, that motion no. M-73712 be
granted and that claim no. 113258 be dismissed.