Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Charbonneau v. State

Charbonneau v. State

178 A.D.2d 815, 577 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16600
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 26, 1991
DocketClaim No. 75681; Claim No. 1; Claim No. 75682; Claim No. 2
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 178 A.D.2d 815 (Charbonneau v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Charbonneau v. State, 178 A.D.2d 815, 577 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16600 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

Crew III, J.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Benza, J.), entered October 30, 1990, which granted the State’s motions to dismiss the claims.

On April 5, 1987 the New York State Thruway Authority Bridge over the Schoharie Creek in Montgomery County collapsed, causing the death of Roland Charbonneau and Jackson C. Dalton. As a result, claimants commenced the above claims against the State for wrongful death. The claims were filed with the Clerk of the Court of Claims and were served upon the Attorney-General by regular mail. The State answered, asserting the defense of lack of jurisdiction and [816]*816thereafter moved to dismiss the claims on that ground. Claimants opposed the State’s motions and cross-moved for leave to file late claims pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (6) and CPLR 205 (a). The Court of Claims granted the State’s motions to dismiss and this appeal ensued. We affirm.

Service of the claims upon the Attorney-General by ordinary mail was insufficient to acquire jurisdiction over the State and they were, therefore, properly dismissed (see, Bogel v State of New York, 175 AD2d 493). Moreover, failure to properly commence the actions deprives claimants of the ameliorative tolling of the Statute of Limitations as provided for in CPLR 205 (a) (see, Matter of Dreger v New York State Thruway Auth., 177 AD2d 762).

We reject claimants’ argument that the State is estopped from asserting lack of jurisdiction. Claimants did not argue that issue in the Court of Claims and are thereby precluded from raising it on appeal (see, Gunzburg v Gunzburg, 152 AD2d 537). However, if we were to consider the issue we would find that estoppel is not available against the State as a matter of public policy (see, Matter of E.F.S. Ventures Corp. v Foster, 71 NY2d 359, 369). Moreover, the State pleaded lack of jurisdiction as an affirmative defense which clearly put claimants on notice of the claimed jurisdictional deficiency, thereby precluding any assertion of estoppel.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs. [See, 148 Misc 2d 891.]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Matter of Amedure v. State of New York
2024 NY Slip Op 24082 (New York Supreme Court, Saratoga County, 2024)
People v. McFadden
2020 NY Slip Op 07759 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Burkett v. State
11 Misc. 3d 322 (New York State Court of Claims, 2005)
Martin v. State
185 Misc. 2d 799 (New York State Court of Claims, 2000)
Conner v. State
268 A.D.2d 706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Chapman v. State
261 A.D.2d 814 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Wade v. Byung Yang Kim
250 A.D.2d 323 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Ruffolo v. Garbarini
239 A.D.2d 8 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Auger v. State
236 A.D.2d 177 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Auger v. State
171 Misc. 2d 866 (New York State Court of Claims, 1997)
Durkin v. Shea
957 F. Supp. 1360 (S.D. New York, 1997)
Gurley v. State
173 Misc. 2d 87 (New York State Court of Claims, 1997)
Villa v. State
228 A.D.2d 930 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Hodge v. State
213 A.D.2d 766 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Flushing National Bank v. State
210 A.D.2d 294 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Scott v. State
204 A.D.2d 424 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Frontier Insurance v. State
160 Misc. 2d 437 (New York State Court of Claims, 1993)
Hodge v. State
158 Misc. 2d 438 (New York State Court of Claims, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
178 A.D.2d 815, 577 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charbonneau-v-state-nyappdiv-1991.