Summary
finding that “[a]lthough denominated an action for declaratory relief, this is essentially an action to recover money damages against a State agency, the proper forum for which is the Court of Claims”
Summary of this case from Miraglia v. State Ins. FundOpinion
No. 1048.
September 24, 2009.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered on May 7, 2008, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion denied, the cross motion granted, and the complaint dismissed, without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Dillon Horowitz Goldstein LLP, New York (Thomas Dillon of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Michael E. Pressman, New York (Robert H. Fischler of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Tom, J.P., Sweeny, McGuire, DeGrasse and Freedman, JJ.
Plaintiff sought defendant's assumption of its defense and indemnity in an underlying personal injury action, and contribution of 50% toward the costs of defending and settling that action. Although denominated an action for declaratory relief, this is essentially an action to recover money damages against a state agency, the proper forum for which is the Court of Claims ( D'Angelo v State Ins. Fund, 48 AD3d 400, 402).