Puckerin v. State

Decision Date14 March 2018
Docket Number2016–01828
Citation69 N.Y.S.3d 836 (Mem),159 A.D.3d 848
Parties Olga L. PUCKERIN, etc., respondent, v. STATE of New York, appellant. (Claim No.121078)
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Andrew Rhys Davies and Andrew W. Amend of counsel), for appellant.

Ross & Hill, Brooklyn, N.Y. (James Ross of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, ROBERT J. MILLER, BETSY BARROS, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a claim, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Court of Claims (Marin, J.), dated August 26, 2015, as denied that branch of its motion which was to dismiss the claim to recover damages for conscious pain and suffering sustained by the claimant's decedent as time-barred.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In 2009, the claimant's decedent, who was then hospitalized at Creedmoor Psychiatric Facility (hereinafter Creedmoor), was transferred by Creedmoor to a New York State-sponsored family care home. The decedent remained a resident of the family care home until July 23, 2011, when he died of "hyperthermia due to environmental exposure." Pursuant to a "New York State Department of Mental Hygiene Family Caretaker Agreement," the decedent "continue[d] to be a legal patient" of Creedmoor while he was a resident of the family care home.

On March 19, 2012, the claimant, as administrator of the decedent's estate, commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for the decedent's conscious pain and suffering. It was claimed that the decedent was left in a room without air conditioning or a fan, causing him to suffer from hyperthermia which ultimately resulted in his death. The defendant moved, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) to dismiss the claim to recover damages for the decedent's conscious pain and suffering on the ground that it was untimely. The Court of Claims denied that branch of the defendant's motion, and the defendant appeals.

Court of Claims Act § 10(3) requires that a claim to recover damages for personal injuries caused by the negligence of an officer or employee of the state must be served upon the attorney general within 90 days after the accrual of such claim. However, pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10(5), "[i]f the claimant shall be under legal disability, the claim may be presented within two years after such disability is removed."

Here, the decedent was hospitalized for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Goines v. State
    • United States
    • New York Court of Claims
    • January 16, 2023
    ... ... 208 for those suffering from the disability of infancy or ... insanity], aff'd for reasons stated 78 N.Y.2d ... 1111 [1991]; Kaplan v State of New York , 152 A.D.2d ... 417, 419 [3d Dept 1989]; see also Boland , 30 N.Y.2d ... at 342-343 [psychiatric hospitalization]; Puckerin v ... State of New York , 159 A.D.3d 848 [2d Dept 2018] ... [psychiatric hospitalization]; Weber v State of New ... York , 267 AD 325 [3d Dept 1944] [infancy]; cf. Baker ... v State of New York , 186 A.D.2d 329, 329 [3d Dept 1992] ... [holding section 10(5) did not apply after "it was ... ...
  • Prime Alliance Grp., Ltd. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 14, 2018
  • People v. Morales
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 14, 2018
    ...159 A.D.3d 84169 N.Y.S.3d 835 (Mem)PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent,v.Nazario MORALES, appellant.201308524Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.Submitted November 16, ... ...
  • Zayed v. Clark Manor Convalescent Ctr., Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 26, 2019
    ...Court, Appellate Division, confirmed its findings in Barrett in a similar case and entered the same ruling. Puckerin v. State of New York , 69 N.Y.S.3d 836, 159 A.D.3d 848 (2018).¶ 24 The state of Wisconsin has also decided this same issue in the same manner as New York. In the Wisconsin ca......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT