From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Downes v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 12, 1980
76 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Opinion

June 12, 1980


Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims, entered December 14, 1978, which denied claimant permission to file a late claim and dismissed the claim. The facts are undisputed. On October 24, 1975, claimant filed a notice of intention to file a claim, alleging that on January 17, 1975, he had been assaulted by a former patient at a State mental hospital. The notice of intention was thus not filed within the requisite 90-day period (Court of Claims Act, § 10, subd 3). On January 14, 1977, a claim was filed with the Clerk of the Court of Claims which sought to recover damages caused by the alleged negligence of the State in failing to provide proper care and custody to the assailant. On September 19, 1978, the State moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the notice of intention had not been filed timely, and in an opposing affidavit dated October 3, 1978, claimant requested permission for late filing. The failure to comply with the filing requirements of section 10 CTC of the Court of Claims Act, which are jurisdictional and must be strictly construed, cannot be excused on the ground that the State was not prejudiced (Lurie v. State of New York, 73 A.D.2d 1006; Matter of Welch v. State of New York, 71 A.D.2d 494). Subdivision 6 of section 10 CTC of the Court of Claims Act requires that permission to file a late notice of intention be sought "at any time before an action asserting a like claim against a citizen of the state would be barred" under the CPLR. Here, the applicable Statute of Limitations for negligence is three years (CPLR 214). Claimant's application for permission to file late was not made until October 3, 1978, the date of his opposing affidavit in which he made the application (see Gibson v. State of New York, 64 A.D.2d 790, 792), or more than three years after the cause of action accrued. The court was, therefore, without jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action (Gibson v. State of New York, supra; Saffioti v. State of New York, 36 A.D.2d 666). Order affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J.P., Main, Mikoll, Casey and Herlihy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Downes v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 12, 1980
76 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)
Case details for

Downes v. State

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH DOWNES, Appellant, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Claim No…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jun 12, 1980

Citations

76 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Citing Cases

Williamsburg Candy v. State

The State correctly points out that the Statute of Limitations applicable to the interposition of a claim for…

Sarlat v. State

This court therefore lacks both the power and jurisdiction to consider the late claim application. (See N Y…