Pro se inmate's motion for summary judgment was denied.
|Claimant(s):||RANDOLPH SCOTT, 15-B-2127|
|Claimant short name:||SCOTT|
|Footnote (claimant name) :|
|Defendant(s):||STATE OF NEW YORK|
|Footnote (defendant name) :|
|Judge:||FRANCIS T. COLLINS|
|Claimant's attorney:||Randolph Scott, Pro Se|
|Defendant's attorney:||Honorable Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General
By: Belinda A. Wagner, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
|Third-party defendant's attorney:|
|Signature date:||August 7, 2018|
|See also (multicaptioned case)|
Claimant, proceeding pro se, moves for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212.
Claimant is an inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. His claim alleges he suffers from various physical disabilities and was deprived of a cane and other accommodations while he was an inmate at Great Meadow Correctional Facility.
" 'To obtain summary judgment it is necessary that the movant establish his cause of action or defense "sufficiently to warrant the court as a matter of law in directing judgment" in his favor (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]), and he must do so by tender of evidentiary proof in admissible form' " (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 ; see also Deleon v New York City Sanitation Dept., 25 NY3d 1102 ; Vega v Restani Constr. Corp., 18 NY3d 499, 503  Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 ). To meet this burden, CPLR 3212 specifically requires a motion for summary judgment be supported by a copy of the pleadings. Only where the movant has made the required showing, does the burden shift to the opposing party "to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to establish the existence of material issues of fact which require a trial of the action" (id.).
Here, claimant's motion for summary judgment failed to include a copy of the pleadings thereby warranting denial of the motion on that basis alone. Moreover, the medical records submitted in support of the motion are not in admissible form and, in any event, would not, standing alone, support a motion for summary judgment in claimant's favor. Accordingly, claimant failed to meet his burden of showing his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.
Based on the foregoing, claimant's motion is denied.
August 7, 2018
Saratoga Springs, New York
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims