New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims
ANDERSON v. STATE OF NEW YORK, # 2021-032-057, Claim No. 134962, Motion No. M-96388

Synopsis

Case information

UID: 2021-032-057
Claimant(s): LA SEAN ANDERSON, 12-A-2895
Claimant short name: ANDERSON
Footnote (claimant name) :
Defendant(s): STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :
Third-party claimant(s):
Third-party defendant(s):
Claim number(s): 134962
Motion number(s): M-96388
Cross-motion number(s):
Judge: JUDITH A. HARD
Claimant's attorney: La Sean Anderson, 12-A-2895, Pro Se
Defendant's attorney: Hon. Letitia James, Attorney General
By: Ray A. Kyles, AAG
Third-party defendant's attorney:
Signature date: June 29, 2021
City: Albany
Comments:
Official citation:
Appellate results:
See also (multicaptioned case)

Decision

Claimant, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed the instant claim for wrongful confinement on June 24, 2020. Claimant now moves to compel the production of certain discovery items. Defendant opposes the motion.

In response to claimant's motion to compel, defendant submitted an affirmation stating that claimant failed to serve any demands for discovery prior to filing the motion (Affirmation of Ray A. Kyles, AAG, 4). Claimant's motion papers do not contain a copy of any discovery demands served upon the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), nor does claimant make any statement establishing that he served discovery demands on the OAG prior to filing the instant motion.

CPLR 3124 states: "[i]f a person fails to respond to or comply with any request, notice, interrogatory, demand, question or order under this article . . . the party seeking disclosure may move to compel compliance or a response." Because claimant failed to show that he served defendant with discovery demands, the instant motion to compel is not properly before the Court and must be denied (McRae v State of New York, UID No. 2015-053-523 [Ct Cl, Sampson, J., Dec. 21, 2015]; Lashway v State of New York, UID No. 2013-049-027 [Ct Cl, Weinstein, J., June 3, 2013]).(1) Claimant must first serve discovery demands upon defendant prior to filing a motion to compel the production of those items of discovery.

Based upon the foregoing, claimant's motion to compel discovery (M-96388) is denied.

June 29, 2021

Albany, New York

JUDITH A. HARD

Judge of the Court of Claims

Papers Considered:

1. Notice of Motion Pursuant to CPLR 3120, dated January 7, 2021; and Affidavit in Support of Motion Pursuant to CPLR 3120, sworn to on January 7, 2021, with Attachments.

2. Defendant's Affirmation in Opposition to Claimant's Motion to Compel, affirmed by Ray A. Kyles, AAG on February 3, 2021, with Exhibit A annexed thereto.

1. Unpublished decisions and selected orders of the Court of Claims are available at http://www.nyscourtofclaims.state.ny.us.