Claimant's discovery motion was denied as he failed to support his motion with a copy of the discovery demand to which he sought a response.
|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 Letitia James, Attorney General
By: Michael T. Krenrich, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
|Third-party defendant's attorney:|
|Signature date:||August 18, 2020|
|See also (multicaptioned case)|
Claimant, proceeding pro se, moves to strike defendant's answer or, in the alternative, to compel compliance with his demands for discovery and inspection.
The instant claim, which is handwritten and difficult to decipher, alleges claimant was injured on September 24, 2017 when he fell due to the negligence of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) in depriving him of the use of a cane during the course of his incarceration.
Although the claimant's failure to support his motion with a copy of a duly served discovery demand would ordinarily require denial of his motion, defendant responded to the motion by providing a copy of its response to claimant's discovery demand. Review of the response indicates the defendant provided claimant with copies of certain documents that he requested. To the extent defendant objected to claimant's demands numbered "4" through "15," primarily on the basis that defense counsel "does not understand this demand and it appears to be incomplete," the Court is unable to determine the propriety of the objections without a copy of the discovery notice at issue (defendant's Exhibit A, p. 2).Accordingly, claimant's motion is denied.
August 18, 2020
Saratoga Springs, New York
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims