Opinion
# 2015-038-581 Claim No. 126310 Motion No. M-87088
12-09-2015
INJAH UNIQUE TAFARI #89A4807v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
INJAH UNIQUE TAFARI, Pro se ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney General of the State of New York By: Douglas R. Kemp, Assistant Attorney General
Synopsis
Defendant's pre-answer motion to dismiss granted. Claimant did not exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his lost or stolen property, and claim was served more than 90 days after the accrual of a cause of action sounding in unlawful confinement.
Case information
| UID: | 2015-038-581 |
| Claimant(s): | INJAH UNIQUE TAFARI #89A4807 |
| Claimant short name: | TAFARI |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 126310 |
| Motion number(s): | M-87088 |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | W. BROOKS DeBOW |
| Claimant's attorney: | INJAH UNIQUE TAFARI, Pro se |
| Defendant's attorney: | ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney General of the State of New York By: Douglas R. Kemp, Assistant Attorney General |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | December 9, 2015 |
| City: | Saratoga Springs |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
Claimant, an individual incarcerated in a State correctional facility, has filed this claim seeking compensation for lost property and for a period of allegedly wrongful confinement. Defendant has made this pre-answer motion to dismiss the claim, which claimant opposes.
Although the claim does not specifically denominate separate causes of action, it alleges that on June 2, 2014, several correction officers were involved in a search of claimant's cell, during which they allegedly destroyed hundreds of pages of documents, which claimant values at $214.25. The claim further alleges that claimant was subjected to confinement in the Special Housing Unit (SHU) for 4 months and loss of certain privileges following a finding of guilt in a disciplinary hearing on June 16, 2014. The claim asserts that the facility Superintendent denied his request for review of that determination, but that on August 15, 2014, the Commissioner of the Department of Correction and Community Supervision (DOCCS) modified the duration of the penalties to 30 days, and that since that penalty was satisfied on July 16, 2014, he was wrongfully confined in the SHU for an additional 30 days. The claim appears to allege further that the administrative determination was reversed in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 on June 3, 2015.
Turning to that part of the claim that seeks compensation for lost property, such a claim "may not be filed unless and until the inmate has exhausted the personal property claims administrative remedy, established for inmates by the department" (Court of Claims Act § 10 [9]), and any such claim must be filed and served not more than 120 days after the administrative remedies have been exhausted (see id.). Claimant has neither alleged nor demonstrated that he pursued or exhausted his administrative remedies for his lost property, and thus, this part of his claim must be dismissed (see Griffin v State of New York, UID No. 2007-015-232 [Ct Cl, Collins, J., Aug. 23, 2007]; Tafari v State of New York, UID No. 2002-019-591 [Ct Cl, Lebous, J., Dec. 9, 2002]).
Defendant argues that the part of the claim that asserts that claimant was wrongfully confined is untimely, inasmuch as the claim was filed and served more than 90 days after its accrual date "in the summer of 2014" (Kemp Affirmation, ¶ 10), apparently referring to the date in August when the disciplinary penalties were modified and claimant was released from the SHU (see Claim ¶¶ 6, 8). The claim was filed on June 17, 2015 and was served on the Attorney General on June 22, 2015 (see Kemp Affirmation, ¶ 11), which defendant argues is more than 90 days after its accrual. In opposition to the motion, claimant appears to assert that this part of the claim is timely because it was filed within 90 days of the date of the Supreme Court decision on his article 78 petition, i.e., the date on which administrative determination was ultimately reversed (see Tafari Reply Affidavit, ¶ 6). However, a cause of action for money damages in the Court of Claims generally accrues when the claimant's damages are reasonably ascertainable (see Augat v State of New York, 244 AD2d 835, 836 [3d Dept 1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 814 [1998]). Notwithstanding the fact that claimant sought judicial review of the administrative disciplinary proceeding determination, "[d]amages arising from wrongful confinement or false imprisonment, as alleged here, are reasonably ascertainable upon a claimant's release from confinement and, therefore, it is on that date that the claimant's cause of action accrues" (Davis v State of New York, 89 AD3d 1287, 1287 [3d Dept 2011]; see Vazquez v State of New York, 23 Misc 3d 1101[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 50527[U], *2 [2009], affd 77 AD3d 1229 [2010]; Jones v State of New York, UID No. 2010-041-020 [Ct Cl, Milano J., May 10, 2010]). Thus, this claim accrued when claimant was released from SHU confinement on or about August 16, 2014. To be timely, the claim had to filed and served within 90 days (see Court of Claims Act § 10 [3-b]), or on or about November 14, 2014. Here, the claim was not served and filed until June 2015, and thus, the cause of action for unlawful confinement is jurisdictionally defective and must be dismissed (see Finnerty v New York State Thruway Auth., 75 NY2d 721, 723 [1989]; Ivy v State of New York, 27 AD3d 1190, 1191 [4th Dept 2006]; Suarez v State of New York, 193 AD2d 1037 [3d Dept 1993]).
In light of the above, defendant's contention that the claim should be dismissed because it was unverified need not be dismissed. In sum, because claimant did not exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to the allegedly lost or stolen property, and because the claim was served more than 90 days after the accrual of a cause of action sounding in unlawful confinement, it is
ORDERED, that motion number M-87088 is GRANTED and claim number 126310 is DISMISSED.
December 9, 2015
Saratoga Springs, New York
W. BROOKS DeBOW
Judge of the Court of Claims Papers considered: (1) Claim number 126310, filed June 17, 2015; (2) Notice of Motion to Dismiss, dated July 22, 2015; (3) Affirmation in Support of Motion to Dismiss, affirmed July 22, 2015, with Exhibit A; (4) Reply Affidavit of Injah Unique Tafari, dated and "sworn to" July 30, 2015.