New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

GELISH v. QUEENS COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT, #2007-016-050, Claim No. 114033, Motion No. M-74015


Synopsis



Case Information

UID:
2007-016-050
Claimant(s):
STEVEN W. GELISH
Claimant short name:
GELISH
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
QUEENS COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
114033
Motion number(s):
M-74015
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant’s attorney:
Steven W. Gelish, Pro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney GeneralBy: Gwendolyn Hatcher, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
November 9, 2007
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

In his underlying claim, Steven M. Gelish alleges that he was incarcerated for “71 extra days” at Rikers Island. Defendant moves to dismiss Mr. Gelish’s claim on the grounds that it was improperly served by regular mail and that such service was untimely. Section 11.a of the Court of Claims Act provides that a claim must be filed with the Clerk of the Court, as well as served on the State via the Attorney General either personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested. Claimant maintains that he served the State by certified mail, return receipt requested and in that regard, submits a copy of a certified mail receipt. However, such receipt shows that the claim was sent to the Clerk of the Court, not to the Attorney General. Defendant has submitted a copy of the envelope in which Mr. Gelish sent his claim to the Attorney General, which indicates that service was performed by regular mail.

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 this claim and the Court need not reach defendant’s remaining arguments.

Accordingly, having reviewed the submissions,[1] it is ordered that motion no. M-74015 be granted and that claim no. 114033 be dismissed.



November 9, 2007
New York, New York

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




  1. [1]The Court reviewed: defendant’s notice of motion with affirmation in support and exhibit A; claimant’s submission entitled “Court of Claims Act, Sec. 206.09 B, C Notice of Motion” filed on October 9, 2007 and consisting of seven pages; claimant’s submission entitled “Court of Claims Act Sec. 206.09C Notice of Motion” filed on October 9, 2007 and consisting of two pages; and claimant’s submission on his letterhead entitled “1. Copy of N.Y.S. Attorney General’s Office Documents” filed on October 9, 2007 and consisting of six pages.