New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims
ROBINSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, # 2017-041-052, Claim No. 128325, Motion No. M-90332

Synopsis

Defendant's motion to dismiss the claim and amended claim is granted where claim failed to comply with the pleading requirements of CPLR 3014 and where claimant failed to timely file and serve amended claim as directed by Court's prior Decision and Order.

Case information

UID: 2017-041-052
Claimant(s): RENDELL ROBINSON
Claimant short name: ROBINSON
Footnote (claimant name) :
Defendant(s): THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :
Third-party claimant(s):
Third-party defendant(s):
Claim number(s): 128325
Motion number(s): M-90332
Cross-motion number(s):
Judge: FRANK P. MILANO
Claimant's attorney: NONE
Defendant's attorney: HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
New York State Attorney General
By: Christina Calabrese, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:
Signature date: July 25, 2017
City: Albany
Comments:
Official citation:
Appellate results:
See also (multicaptioned case)

Decision

Defendant moves to dismiss the claim and the amended claim. Claimant has not appeared in opposition to the defendant's motion.

Defendant previously moved (M-89182) to dismiss the claim because the claim failed to comply with the pleading requirements of CPLR 3013 and 3014 and failed to satisfy the requirements of Court of Claims Act 11 (b).

Defendant argued that the claim should be dismissed because it is "illegible and unintelligible" and "lacks specificity." Defendant further asserted that "due to the voluminous nature of the Claim and the exhibits" defendant is required to "inappropriately ferret out, assemble and interpret information."

Defendant additionally asserted that the claim failed to set forth the nature of the claim as required by Court of Claims Act 11 (b), thus depriving the Court of jurisdiction.

The claim, which appeared to intend causes of action for medical malpractice and assault, consisted of 55, difficult to read, in certain places illegible, handwritten pages and an additional 97 pages of similarly difficult to read exhibits.

CPLR 3014 requires a pleading to "consist of plain and concise statements in consecutively numbered paragraphs" each containing, "as far as practicable, a single allegation."

The Court found, in its prior Decision and Order filed on January 3, 2017, that the claim failed to comply with the pleading requirements of CPLR 3014 and that the defendant's motion to dismiss the claim was conditionally granted unless claimant served and filed, by regular mail within sixty days of the filing of the prior Decision and Order, an amended claim consisting of "plain and concise statements in consecutively numbered paragraphs," each containing, "as far as practicable, a single allegation."

Defendant has submitted uncontradicted proof that the amended claim was not served until March 25, 2017, at the earliest, and April 5, 2017, at the latest, each date more than sixty (60) days after the filing of the prior Decision and Order. The Court further notes that the amended claim was not filed with the Clerk of the Court of Claims until March 31, 2017, also more than sixty (60) days after the filing of the prior Decision and Order.

The amended claim is dismissed because claimant has failed to comply with the filing and service conditions of the Court's prior Decision and Order (M-89182, filed January 3, 2017).

The claim is dismissed because it failed to comply with the pleading requirements of CPLR 3014 and was not timely amended as directed in the Court's prior Decision and Order.

The claim and amended claim are dismissed.

July 25, 2017

Albany, New York

FRANK P. MILANO

Judge of the Court of Claims

Papers Considered:

1. Defendant's Notice of Motion to Dismiss, filed May 1, 2017;

2. Affirmation of Christina Calabrese, dated May 1, 2017, and attached exhibits.