From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guity v. State

New York State Court of Claims
May 4, 2020
# 2020-045-016 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. May. 4, 2020)

Opinion

# 2020-045-016 Claim No. None Motion No. M-94932

05-04-2020

IN THE MATTER OF PAULA GUITY, PRO SE (ON BEHALF OF HERSELF, ESSIE A. AUSTIN AND THE ESTATE OF ESSIE A. AUSTIN) v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Paula Guity, Pro Se Hon. Letitia James, Attorney General By: Mario E. Simmons, Assistant Attorney General


Synopsis

Pro se claimant's motion to file a late claim prior to appointment as administrator.

Case information


UID:

2020-045-016

Claimant(s):

IN THE MATTER OF PAULA GUITY, PRO SE (ON BEHALF OF HERSELF, ESSIE A. AUSTIN AND THE ESTATE OF ESSIE A. AUSTIN)

Claimant short name:

GUITY

Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):

THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Footnote (defendant name) :

The Court has amended the caption, sua sponte, to reflect the State of New York as the proper defendant.

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):

None

Motion number(s):

M-94932

Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:

GINA M. LOPEZ-SUMMA

Claimant's attorney:

Paula Guity, Pro Se

Defendant's attorney:

Hon. Letitia James, Attorney General By: Mario E. Simmons, Assistant Attorney General

Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:

May 4, 2020

City:

Hauppauge

Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)


Decision

The following papers were read and considered by the Court on this motion: Claimants' Notice of Motion; Claimants' Affidavit in Support with annexed Exhibits; and Defendant's Affirmation in Opposition.

Claimants, Paula Guity, Pro Se (On Behalf of Herself, Essie A. Austin and the Estate of Essie A. Austin), have brought this motion seeking an order pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (6) granting permission to file a late claim.

Claimants allege that decedent, Essie Austin, was a patient at Stony Brook University Hospital from July 31, 2019 through her death on August 10, 2019. The claim seeks damages for, inter alia, conscious pain and suffering, negligence, medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, discrimination, retaliation, pecuniary damages and wrongful death.

Defendant points out that Paula Guity has not attached letters of administration to the motion. Defendant argues that the motion must be denied since Paula Guity lacks the capacity to sue on behalf decedent's estate because only a duly appointed representative may bring suit on behalf of a decedent. Ms. Guity sets forth in her affidavit that she understands that she needs to receive letters of administration before she can file a claim on her mother's behalf. However, no letters of administration were attached to the motion nor did Ms. Guity otherwise contend or establish that she received letters of administration.

The Court of Appeals has long held that "[b]ecause suits against the State are allowed only by the State's waiver of sovereign immunity and in derogation of the common law, statutory requirements conditioning suit must be strictly construed" (Lichtenstein v State of New York, 93 NY2d 911 [1999]; Dreger v New York State Thruway Auth., 81 NY2d 721, 724 [1992]). In the Court of Claims wrongful death actions are governed by Court of Claims Act § 10 (2) while negligence claims fall under Court of Claims Act § 10 (3). Both sections contemplate that an executor or administrator be formally appointed before commencing an action against the State on behalf of decedent (Lichtenstein v State of New York, 93 NY2d 911 [1999]).

Court of Claims Act § 10 (2) provides that:

"[a] claim by an executor or administrator of a decedent who left him or her surviving a husband, wife or next of kin, for damages for a wrongful act, neglect or default, on the part of the state by which the decedent's death was caused, shall be filed and served upon the attorney general within ninety days after the appointment of such executor or administrator, unless the claimant shall within such time serve upon the attorney general a written notice of intention to file a claim therefor, in which event the claim shall be filed and served upon the attorney general within two years after the death of the decedent. In any event such claim shall be filed and served upon the attorney general within two years after the death of the decedent."

In the present matter, it is undisputed that the motion for late claim relief was filed prior to such an appointment. As a result the motion seeking late claim relief on behalf of decedent must be denied (id.; Thomas v State of New York, 57 AD3d 969 [2d Dept 2008]).

To the extent Ms. Guity is seeking late claim relief in regard to her independent claim for pecuniary damages it must also be denied. A cause of action to recover a pecuniary loss does not exist independently from the decedent's cause of action (Doria v Benisch, 130 AD3d 777 [2d Dept 2015]; Klein v Metropolitan Child Servs., Inc., 100 AD3d 708 [2d Dept 2012]). Consequently, the derivative cause of action cannot survive the denial of the main claims for damages (id.).

Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, claimants' motion is denied.

May 4, 2020

Hauppauge, New York

GINA M. LOPEZ-SUMMA

Judge of the Court of Claims


Summaries of

Guity v. State

New York State Court of Claims
May 4, 2020
# 2020-045-016 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. May. 4, 2020)
Case details for

Guity v. State

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF PAULA GUITY, PRO SE (ON BEHALF OF HERSELF, ESSIE A…

Court:New York State Court of Claims

Date published: May 4, 2020

Citations

# 2020-045-016 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. May. 4, 2020)