New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims
ANAND v. STATE OF NEW YORK, # 2019-015-138 , Claim No. 129898, 129899, Motion No. M-93704

Synopsis

Claimant's motion to reargue was denied.

Case information

UID: 2019-015-138
Claimant(s): CHANDRABHUSHAN ANAND
Claimant short name: ANAND
Footnote (claimant name) :
Defendant(s): STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :
Third-party claimant(s):
Third-party defendant(s):
Claim number(s): 129898, 129899
Motion number(s): M-93704
Cross-motion number(s):
Judge: FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Claimant's attorney: Chandrabhushan Anand, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney: Honorable Letitia James, Attorney General
By: Douglas R. Kemp, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:
Signature date: April 26, 2019
City: Saratoga Springs
Comments:
Official citation:
Appellate results:
See also (multicaptioned case)

Decision

Claimant moves to reargue his prior motion which requested a change of venue and an Order compelling a response to his request for discovery.

Claimant, a former employee of the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, alleges in claim numbers 129898 and 129899 that he was not paid all of the monies to which he was entitled upon his retirement on February 21, 2017.

A motion to reargue is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court and requires the moving party to demonstrate that the Court overlooked or misapprehended matters of fact or misapplied existing law to the facts presented (see CPLR, Rule 2221 [d] [2]; Matter of Ellsworth v Town of Malta, 16 AD3d 948 [3d Dept 2005]; Peak v Northway Travel Trailers, 260 AD2d 840 [3d Dept 1999]; Spa Realty Assoc. v Springs Assoc., 213 AD2d 781 [3d Dept 1995]). Such a motion does not serve as a vehicle to permit the unsuccessful party to argue once again the very questions previously decided (Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 567 [1st Dept 1979], lv denied 56 NY2d 507 [1982]). Claimant has failed to demonstrate that the Court overlooked matters of fact or misapplied existing law to the facts presented. Rather, he raises the very same arguments the Court previously rejected.

Accordingly, claimant's motion is denied.

April 26, 2019

Saratoga Springs, New York

FRANCIS T. COLLINS

Judge of the Court of Claims

Papers Considered:

  1. Notice of motion dated March 15, 2019;
  2. Affidavit in support sworn to March 15, 2019, with attachments;
  3. Defendant's affirmation dated April 10, 2019.