Opinion
# 2021-015-018 Claim No. 135325 Motion No. M-96150
01-09-2021
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, and AD HOC NEW YORKER REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Christopher Earl Strunk, Pro Se Honorable Letitia James, Attorney General By: Anthony Rotondi, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
Synopsis
Claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action.
Case information
| UID: | 2021-015-018 |
| Claimant(s): | CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, and AD HOC NEW YORKER REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE |
| Claimant short name: | STRUNK |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 135325 |
| Motion number(s): | M-96150 |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | FRANCIS T. COLLINS |
| Claimant's attorney: | Christopher Earl Strunk, Pro Se |
| Defendant's attorney: | Honorable Letitia James, Attorney General By: Anthony Rotondi, Esq., Assistant Attorney General |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | January 9, 2021 |
| City: | Saratoga Springs |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
Defendant moves for dismissal of the instant claim pursuant to CPLR 3212 (a) (2), (3) and (7) on the grounds the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear and decide the claim, lack of standing, and failure to state a cause of action.
Claimants Christopher Earl Strunk and the Ad Hoc New Yorker Republican Committee seek injunctive relief requiring the State of New York to clarify for voters that candidates for either President or Vice-President must be born in the United States, that all requests for absentee ballots include such a clarification, and that notice be displayed at the polls that Kamala Devi Harris is not a natural born citizen. Claimants also seek monetary relief for fluctuations in the value of gold and lost opportunity.
The law is clear that "[a]s a court of limited jurisdiction, the Court of Claims has no jurisdiction to grant strictly equitable relief" (Madura v State of New York, 12 AD3d 759, 760 [3d Dept 2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 704 [2005], citing Psaty v Duryea, 306 NY 413 [1954]; Ozanam Hall of Queens Nursing Home v State of New York, 241 AD2d 670, 671 [3d Dept 1997]; see Court of Claims Act § 9). As a result, this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and decide the claim, most of which seeks strictly equitable relief.
To the extent claimants seek a monetary recovery based on fluctuations in the value of gold, the claim is nonsensical and fails to state a cause of action even when its allegations are given the benefit of every favorable inference (MLB Constr. Servs., LLC v Lake Ave. Plaza, LLC, 156 AD3d 983, 984 [3d Dept 2017]). Based on the foregoing, defendant's motion is granted and the claim is dismissed.
January 9, 2021
Saratoga Springs, New York
FRANCIS T. COLLINS
Judge of the Court of Claims Papers Considered:
1. Notice of motion dated October 15, 2020;
2. Affirmation in support dated October 15, 2020, with Exhibits A-E;
3. Unsworn affidavit in opposition dated November 30, 2020, with attachments.