Unverified claim dismissed
|Claimant short name:||BELL|
|Footnote (claimant name) :|
|Defendant(s):||THE STATE OF NEW YORK|
|Footnote (defendant name) :|
|Claimant's attorney:||ANDREW BELL
|Defendant's attorney:||HON. BARBARA D. UNDERWOOD
Attorney General for the State of New York
By: Belinda A. Wagner, Assistant Attorney General
|Third-party defendant's attorney:|
|Signature date:||May 23, 2018|
|See also (multicaptioned case)|
The following papers were read and considered by the Court on defendant's unopposed motion to dismiss:
Notice of Motion, Attorney's Supporting Affirmation and Exhibit
Defendant brings this pre-answer motion to dismiss Claim No. 130640 on the ground that this Court is without jurisdiction over the claim because the claim was not verified as required by Court of Claims Act § 11 (b).
The requirements set forth in the Court of Claims Act §§ 10 and 11 are jurisdictional in nature and require strict compliance as a precondition of suit against the State (see Prisco v State of New York, 62 AD3d 978 [2d Dept 2009]). A failure to comply with any aspect of the service provisions is a jurisdictional defect compelling the dismissal of the claim (see Kolnacki v State of New York, 8 NY3d 277, 281  [ "(t)he failure to satisfy any of the (statutory) conditions is a jurisdictional defect"]; Welch v State of New York, 286 AD2d 496, 497-98 [2d Dept 2001]).
Therefore, this claim is jurisdictionally defective and warrants dismissal because it was not verified (see Kolnacki, 8 NY3d 277; Lepkowski v State of New York, 1 NY3d 201, 210 ).
Accordingly, defendant's unopposed motion to dismiss the claim is GRANTED.
May 23, 2018
White Plains, New York
Judge of the Court of Claims