Lepkowski v. State
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1DissentLahtinen, J.
We respectfully dissent. “[P]ublic policy * * * seeks to reduce rather than increase the obstacles to recovery of damages, whether defendant is a private person *768or a public body” (Brown v State of New York, 89 NY2d 172, 180). The requirements regarding the contents of the claim, as set forth in Court of Claims Act § 11, “should receive a reasonable construction and not one that unjustly deprives a suitor of the right to recover” (Chalmers & Son v State of New York, 271 App Div 699, 701, affd 297 NY 690). The contents of a claim are sufficiently definite if the allegations are “specific enough…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Brown v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Finnerty v. New York State Thruway AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Heisler v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Harvey Chalmers & Son, Inc. v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- Miller v. Board of AssessorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.