New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

REED v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2009-015-123, Claim No. 115703, Motion No. M-75573


Synopsis


Pro se inmate's motion to extend his time to respond to defendant's answer and for leave to file motion to obtain discovery was denied as unnecessary.

Case Information

UID:
2009-015-123
Claimant(s):
BENJI D. REED
Claimant short name:
REED
Footnote (claimant name) :

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

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
115703
Motion number(s):
M-75573
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Claimant’s attorney:
Benji D. Reed, Pro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General
By: Stephen J. Maher, EsquireAssistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
January 23, 2009
City:
Saratoga Springs
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant, an inmate proceeding pro se, moves for an Order extending his time to file a response to the defendant’s answer. In what the claimant denominated an “addendum” to this motion, he requests leave to file a motion to obtain certain items of discovery and a bill of particulars. No response to the defendant’s answer is required and leave of court is not required to serve demands for discovery or a demand for a bill of particulars. CPLR article 31governs the procedures for obtaining discovery and CPLR article 30 governs the procedures for obtaining a bill of particulars (see CPLR §§ 3041, 3042, 3043 and CPLR 3044).

Accordingly, claimant’s motion is denied as unnecessary.


January 23, 2009
Saratoga Springs, New York

HON. FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims


The Court considered the following papers:
  1. Notice of motion dated September 19, 2008;
  2. Unsworn Affidavit of Benji D. Reed dated September 19, 2008;
  3. Letter of Stephen J. Maher dated October 29, 2008.