New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims
WORD v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, # 2019-054-014, Claim No. 131356, Motion No. M-93478

Synopsis

claimant's motion for renewal denied, lacking a basis under CPLR 2221 (e)

Case information

UID: 2019-054-014
Claimant(s): DIANE WORD
Claimant short name: WORD
Footnote (claimant name) :
Defendant(s): THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :
Third-party claimant(s):
Third-party defendant(s):
Claim number(s): 131356
Motion number(s): M-93478
Cross-motion number(s):
Judge: WALTER RIVERA
Claimant's attorney: DIANE WORD
Pro Se
Defendant's attorney: HON. LETITIA JAMES
Attorney General for the State of New York
By: Matthew H. Feinberg, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:
Signature date: April 3, 2019
City: White Plains
Comments:
Official citation:
Appellate results:
See also (multicaptioned case)

Decision

The following papers numbered 1-2 were read and considered by the Court on claimant's motion for renewal:

Notice of Motion, Claimant's Supporting Affidavit and Exhibit................................1

Defendant's Affirmation in Opposition, Memorandum of Law and Exhibits..........2

Claimant brings this second motion to renew regarding this Court's Decision and Order (Word v State of New York, UID No. 2018-054-065 [Ct Cl, Rivera, J., June 20, 2018]) which granted defendant's motion to dismiss Claim No. 131356 on jurisdictional grounds.

By Decision and Order filed-stamped December 3, 2018 (Word v State of New York, UID No. 2018-054-109 [Ct Cl, Rivera, J., October 29, 2018]), this Court denied claimant's motion for renewal as unfounded and lacking a basis under CPLR 2221 (e).

By Decision and Order filed-stamped September 10, 2018 (Word v State of New York, UID No. 2018-054-087 [Ct Cl, Rivera, J., August 30, 2018]), this Court denied claimant's motion for reargument noting that a reargument motion is not "a vehicle to permit the unsuccessful party to argue once again the very questions previously decided" (see Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 567 [1st Dept 1979]).

The Court denies claimant's second motion for renewal as unfounded and lacking a basis under CPLR 2221 (e) to grant her application. The Court further notes that a renewal motion is not a vehicle to argue once again the questions previously decided by the Court.

Claimant is once again reminded that "sanctionable conduct is such that 'is completely without merit in law and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law' (22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]), and that further frivolous motion practice may subject her to monetary sanctions (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]; [d]; 22 NYCRR 130-1.2)" (Word v State of New York, UID No. 2014-038-504 [Ct Cl, DeBow, J., February 10, 2014]).

Accordingly, claimant's motion to renew is DENIED.

April 3, 2019

White Plains, New York

WALTER RIVERA

Judge of the Court of Claims