Fuller v. State

11 A.D.3d 365, 783 N.Y.S.2d 370
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 21, 2004·No. Claim No. 107483·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[366]*366Order, State of New York, Court of Claims (Alan C. Marin, J.), entered September 16, 2003, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Claimant failed to establish the grounds for a constitutional tort (see Martinez v City of Schenectady, 97 NY2d 78 [2001]; cf. Brown v State of New York, 89 NY2d 172 [1996]). Furthermore, the State is not subject to liability in the Court of Claims for the consequences of official acts of a district attorney, under a theory of respondeat superior, because he is not an officer or employee of the State (Fisher v State of New York, 10 NY2d 60 [1961]; see Court of Claims Act § 9 [2]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Williams, Lerner and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Fuller v. State, 11 A.D.3d 365, 783 N.Y.S.2d 370 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

11 A.D.3d 365 (Fuller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marshall v. State of New York
2025 NY Slip Op 51390(U) (New York State Court of Claims, 2025)