Molinaro v. State
New York Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtFred A. Young, J.
This is a motion for an order dismissing the ¡above-entitled -claim upon the ground that the court does mot have jurisdiction over the subject matter of this .action since the claim -was not filed within 9.0 days -after the ¿accrual of said action as .provided under subdivision 3 of section 10 of the Court of Claims Act.
There is mo question that a claimant faced with acts -of continuing trespassing must file within 90 days of the accrual. (La Rose v. State of New York, 199 Misc. 317.)
Also it is well settled that the 90-day period established by subdivision 3 of section 10 of the Court of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Paduano v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Allen v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1955
- La Rose v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1950
- Rizzo v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1951
- Kosciuszko v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1959
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sweet v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1982
- Jaycox v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1962
- Bantelman v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1961