Opinion
# 2016-016-033 Claim No. 126511 Motion No. M-88251
05-17-2016
SANDRA MORRISON-ALLEN v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Sandra Morrison-Allen, Pro se Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General By: Joseph L. Paterno, AAG
Synopsis
Case information
| UID: | 2016-016-033 |
| Claimant(s): | SANDRA MORRISON-ALLEN |
| Claimant short name: | MORRISON-ALLEN |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 126511 |
| Motion number(s): | M-88251 |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | Alan C. Marin |
| Claimant's attorney: | Sandra Morrison-Allen, Pro se |
| Defendant's attorney: | Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General By: Joseph L. Paterno, AAG |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | May 17, 2016 |
| City: | New York |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
Sandra Morrison-Allen moves to reargue this Court's Decision and Order dated November 23, 2015, which had dismissed her claim arising from the termination of her parental rights in Family Court, Queens County. The Decision and Order held that the Court of Claims lacked subject matter jurisdiction: the Court has jurisdiction only to hear and decide cases that involve money damages against the State of New York or entities specified by statute such as the Thruway Authority; it does not review custody or permanency hearings - - which review had already been undertaken in the matter by an appellate court ( Matter of Stephen Daniel A. (Sandra M.-A.) ,122 AD3d 837 (2014) lv denied 24 NY3d 916 [2015]).
A motion for leave to reargue must be based upon matters of fact or law overlooked or misapprehended by the court in the prior order. A related motion is one for leave to renew, which is to be based upon new facts not offered or new law that would change the prior determination; in cases involving new facts, there must be a reasonable justification for not presenting them in the earlier motion (Subdivisions [d] and [e] of CPLR Rule 2221).
Under either course, Ms. Morrison-Allen does not make a showing that would result in the reconsideration of the November 23, 2015 Decision and Order; claimant cites only provisions of the United States Constitution and cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In view of the foregoing, and having reviewed the submissions of the parties, IT IS ORDERED that motion No. M-88251 is denied.
The following were reviewed: from claimant - - a Motion for Reargument and an Affirmation in Support (appending the November 23, 2015 Decision and Order); from defendant - - an Affirmation in Opposition to Claimant's Motion for Reargument.
May 17, 2016
New York, New York
Alan C. Marin
Judge of the Court of Claims