Opinion
# 2014-041-040 Claim No. 122204 Motion No. M-84677
07-02-2014
GLASCO WRIGHT v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
GLASCO WRIGHT Pro Se HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN New York State Attorney General By: Michael C. Rizzo, Esq. Assistant Attorney General
Synopsis
Claimant's motion for default and/or summary judgment on bailment claim is denied where defendant is not in default and claimant has made multiple summary judgment motions.
Case information
| UID: | 2014-041-040 |
| Claimant(s): | GLASCO WRIGHT |
| Claimant short name: | WRIGHT |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 122204 |
| Motion number(s): | M-84677 |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | FRANK P. MILANO |
| Claimant's attorney: | GLASCO WRIGHT Pro Se |
| Defendant's attorney: | HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN New York State Attorney General By: Michael C. Rizzo, Esq. Assistant Attorney General |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | July 2, 2014 |
| City: | Albany |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
Claimant moves for a default judgment in this inmate lost property claim. Defendant opposes the motion.
Defendant is not in default and the motion is denied.
To the extent that claimant's motion can be viewed as a motion for summary judgment, the motion is denied.
Claimant previously moved for summary judgment and the motion was denied, with leave to renew, by the Court's Decision and Order, filed November 14, 2013, because claimant failed to provide a copy of the pleadings in support of the motion as required by CPLR 3212 (b).
Claimant again moved for summary judgment, on or about November 29, 2013, and that motion was denied by this Court's Decision and Order, filed on March 26, 2014.
"Multiple summary judgment motions in the same action should be discouraged in the absence of a showing of newly discovered evidence or other sufficient cause" (La Freniere v Capital Dist. Transp. Auth., 105 AD2d 517, 518 [3d Dept 1984]; see Keating v Town of Burke, 105 AD3d 1127 [3d Dept 2013]).
Claimant has failed to identify any newly discovered evidence, or otherwise offer sufficient cause, to support a further summary judgment motion.
Claimant's motion for a default judgment and/or summary judgment is denied.
July 2, 2014
Albany, New York
FRANK P. MILANO
Judge of the Court of Claims
Papers Considered:
1. Claimant's Notice of Motion for Default Judgment, filed February 25, 2014;
2. Affirmation of Glasco Wright, dated February 21, 2014, and annexed exhibits;
3. Affirmation of Michael C. Rizzo, dated April 30, 2014;
4. Unsigned Response of Glasco Wright, dated May 11, 2014, and annexed exhibits.