Pro se claimant's motion for summary judgment was denied as deficient, lacking an affidavit or any evidence in admissible form. Given that this is the third motion submitted by claimant that is not supported by an affidavit or admissible evidence, he was warned that this constitutes frivolous conduct and if he persists in filing inadequate motions the Court will consider sanctioning him.
|Claimant short name:||DIAZ|
|Footnote (claimant name) :|
|Defendant(s):||STATE OF NEW YORK|
|Footnote (defendant name) :|
|Claim number(s):||132770, 132899|
|Judge:||DEBRA A. MARTIN|
|Claimant's attorney:||MIGUEL DIAZ, PRO SE|
|Defendant's attorney:||HON. LETITIA JAMES
New York State Attorney General
BY: MICHAEL T. KRENRICH, ESQ.
Assistant Attorney General
|Third-party defendant's attorney:|
|Signature date:||December 11, 2020|
|See also (multicaptioned case)|
The following papers were read on claimant's motion for summary judgment:
1. Notice of Motion with attached exhibits, filed July 15, 2020;
2. Affirmation of Michael T. Krenrich, AAG, with attached exhibit, dated August 20, 2020.
Before the Court is claimant's motion seeking summary judgment in his favor regarding his personal injury claim (Claim No. 132770) and medical malpractice claim (Claim No. 132899) that stemmed from an incident on February 22, 2019 while he was an inmate at Upstate Correctional Facility. The defendant submitted papers in opposition contending that claimant's motion was statutorily deficient in that copies of the pleadings were not attached, and the motion was not supported by an affidavit nor admissible evidence.
The Court denies claimant's motion on the ground he has failed to sustain his burden of proof. Claimant moved for summary judgment without attaching a copy of the pleadings as required by CPLR 3212 (b). Furthermore, despite prior admonitions by this Court, this is the third motion claimant has brought that is not supported by an affidavit or evidence in admissible form. (see Diaz v State of New York, Ct Cl, January 10, 2020, Martin, J., Claim Nos. 132770 and 132899, UID No. 2020-051-005; Diaz v State of New York, Ct Cl, May 4, 2020, Martin, J., Claim Nos. 132770 and 132899, UID No. 2020-051-031.) Given its prior decisions regarding claimant's deficient claims, the Court refers claimant to its earlier decisions regarding the statutory requirements of motion practice.
The Court cautions claimant that the filing of motions that do not comply with the minimum statutory requirements for such relief needlessly wastes the time and limited resources of the Court and the parties, and constitutes evidence of frivolous behavior. If the claimant brings another motion not supported by a sworn affidavit and evidence in admissible form, the Court will consider whether such omission constitutes a sanctionable event pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-and, if it so finds, will consider awarding financial sanctions or take other action to limit claimant's ability to litigate pending or future claims.
In light of the above, claimant's second motion for summary judgment (M-95674), regarding Claim Nos. 132770 and 132899 is denied.
December 11, 2020
Rochester, New York
DEBRA A. MARTIN
Judge of the Court of Claims