Scott v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Scott v. State

46 A.D.3d 664, 846 N.Y.S.2d 585

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 11, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 46 A.D.3d 664 (Scott 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

Scott v. State, 46 A.D.3d 664, 846 N.Y.S.2d 585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Scuccimarra, J.), dated December 23, 2005, which denied its motion to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Since the defendant failed to comply with the provisions of [665]*665CPLR 3022 for rejecting an unverified claim, and for the reasons set forth by the Court of Claims and adopted by this Court in Scott v State of New York (46 AD3d 664 [2007] [decided herewith]), the Court of Claims properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction (see Lepkowski v State of New York, 1 NY3d 201, 210 [2003]; Court of Claims Act § 11 [b], former [c]). Crane, J.P., Goldstein, Florio and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Scuccimarra, J.), dated December 23, 2005, which denied its motion to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Since the defendant failed to comply with the provisions of [665]*665CPLR 3022 for rejecting an unverified claim, and for the reasons set forth by the Court of Claims and adopted by this Court in Scott v State of New York (46 AD3d 664 [2007] [decided herewith]), the Court of Claims properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction (see Lepkowski v State of New York, 1 NY3d 201, 210 [2003]; Court of Claims Act § 11 [b], former [c]). Crane, J.P., Goldstein, Florio and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.D.3d 664, 846 N.Y.S.2d 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-state-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack