From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 25, 2007
43 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2006-10091.

September 25, 2007.

In a claim, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Waldon, J.), dated August 17, 2006, which granted that branch of the claimant's motion which was for leave to amend the claim to add the total sum claimed and denied its cross motion to dismiss the claim as jurisdictionally defective.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Peter H. Schiff and Michael S. Buskus of counsel), for Appellant.

Salenger, Sack, Schwartz Kimmel, LLP (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac DeCicco, New York, N.Y. [Brian J. Isaac and Michael H. Zhu] of counsel), for Respondent.

Before: Rivera, J.P., Florio, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.


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

In light of the recent amendment of Court of Claims Act § 11 (b) (L 2007, ch 606, § 1), retroactively abrogating Kolnacki v State of New York ( 8 NY3d 277), the instant claim was not jurisdictionally defective notwithstanding the absence of an ad damnum clause.

The parties' remaining contentions need not be addressed in light of our determination.


Summaries of

Moore v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 25, 2007
43 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Moore v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAWN MOORE, Respondent, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant

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

Date published: Sep 25, 2007

Citations

43 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 6960
841 N.Y.S.2d 797

Citing Cases

Moises v. State

While section 11 (b) does not require "absolute exactness," a claim must set forth the nature of the claim…