Wilson v. State
| Citation | 2009 NY Slip Op 03246,876 N.Y.S.2d 818,61 A.D.3d 1367 |
| Decision Date | 24 April 2009 |
| Docket Number | CA 07-02464. |
| Parties | PATRICIA WILSON, Respondent, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Claim No. 111995.) |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Renee Forgensi Minarik, J.), entered October 22, 2007 in a personal injury action. The order denied the motion of defendant to dismiss the claim.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted and the claim is dismissed.
Memorandum: Claimant commenced this action seeking damages for injuries she allegedly sustained when she slipped and fell while she was an inmate in a correctional facility. We agree with defendant that the Court of Claims erred in denying its motion to dismiss the claim based on claimant's failure to include required information in the notice of intention to file a claim. Court of Claims Act § 10 (3) provides in relevant part that a claimant seeking to recover damages for personal injuries caused by the negligence of a New York State officer or employee must file and serve a notice of claim or a notice of intention to file a claim within 90 days after the claim accrues. Pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 11 (b), the claim or notice of intention to file a claim "shall state the time when and place where such claim arose, the nature of same, [and] the items of damage or injuries claimed to have been sustained." The requirements in section 11 (b) are "substantive conditions upon the State's waiver of sovereign immunity" (Lepkowski v State of New York, 1 NY3d 201, 207 [2003]), and noncompliance renders a claim "jurisdictionally defective for nonconformity" (id. at 209; see Kolnacki v State of New York, 8 NY3d 277, 281 [2007], rearg denied 8 NY3d 994 [2007]). Furthermore, "a lack of prejudice to the State is an immaterial factor" (Byrne v State of New York, 104 AD2d 782, 784 [1984], lv denied 64 NY2d 607 [1985]). Here, the notice of intention to file a claim is jurisdictionally defective inasmuch as it fails to state both a year in which the injury allegedly occurred and a particular road or place on such road where claimant allegedly fell, thereby failing to "state the time when and place where such claim arose" (Court of Claims Act § 11 [b]; see Sega v State of New York, 246 AD2d 753 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 805 [1998]; Cobin v State of New York, 234 AD2d 498, 499 [1996], lv...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sommer v. State
...the location at which claimant fell was insufficient to permit defendant to investigate its liability (see Wilson v. State of New York, 61 A.D.3d 1367, 1368–1369, 876 N.Y.S.2d 818 [2009] ; Sega v. State of New York, 246 A.D.2d 753, 755, 668 N.Y.S.2d 56 [1998], lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 805, 677 ......
-
Aguilera v. State (In re Geneva Foundry Litig.)
...to satisfy them mandates dismissal of the claim without regard to whether the State was prejudiced (see Wilson v. State of New York , 61 A.D.3d 1367, 1368, 876 N.Y.S.2d 818 [4th Dept. 2009] ) or had access to the requisite information from its own records (see Lepkowski v. State of New York......
-
Johnson v. State
...(see discussion in Yanus v. State , 35 Misc. 3d 361, 366, 937 N.Y.S.2d 825 [Ct. Cl., 2011], citing Wilson v. State of New York , 61 A.D.3d 1367 1368, 876 N.Y.S.2d 818 [4th Dept. 2009] ). As is made clear by the Court of Appeals’ citation of Heisler in Lepkowski , there has been no similar q......
-
Hatzfeld v. State
...or a claim with respect to that incident within 90 days after the claim's accrual ( see§ 10[3]; see also Wilson v. State of New York, 61 A.D.3d 1367, 1368, 876 N.Y.S.2d 818). Contrary to the contention of claimant, the continuous treatment doctrine does not render his negligence claims time......