New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

THOMAS v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2007-040-049, Claim No. 107462


Synopsis


Dismissal – Failure to appear at trial and prosecute claim.

Case Information

UID:
2007-040-049
Claimant(s):
DOUGLAS THOMAS, 99-A-6850
Claimant short name:
THOMAS
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
107462
Motion number(s):

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
CHRISTOPHER J. McCARTHY
Claimant’s attorney:
Douglas Thomas, Pro Se(no appearance)
Defendant’s attorney:
ANDREW M. CUOMO
Attorney General of the State of New YorkBy: Kevan J. Acton, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
September 25, 2007
City:
Albany
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant was an inmate at Bare Hill Correctional Facility in Malone (hereinafter Bare Hill). The Claim is based on allegations that Claimant injured his index finger when he attempted to place a weight back into the weight rack at Bare Hill’s gym. The Claim further asserts that Defendant was on notice that the rack was dangerous and that the rack was not properly maintained.

The Claim was filed with the Clerk of this Court on March 12, 2003. By letter dated April 20, 2007, the Court scheduled this Claim for a bifurcated trial, addressing liability issues only. The trial was scheduled to take place at the Court of Claims in Albany on this date. The letter was returned to the Court by the postal service along with a forwarding address in Dover, Delaware. The Court re-sent the letter to the new address on April 25, 2007. The letter was not returned to the Court. By letter dated September 10, 2007, the Court forwarded its Order concerning the scheduling and subject matter of a trial preparation conference in this matter that was to have been held this morning prior to the commencement of the trial of this Claim. Likewise, that letter was not returned to the Court. Claimant failed to appear and the State made a motion to dismiss the claim on the basis of Claimant’s default. A bench decision was rendered granting the State’s motion to dismiss for the reasons set forth by the Court on the record. The Claim is, therefore, dismissed with prejudice.


September 25, 2007
Albany, New York

HON. CHRISTOPHER J. MCCARTHY
Judge of the Court of Claims