Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014

Miranda v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided January 16, 2014 · Stein

113 A.D.3d 943; 978 N.Y.2d 463

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Trimble v. State of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Cappetta v. State of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
Young v. State of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Canales v. State (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2015)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Stein, J.

We affirm. Pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 11 (a) (i), a notice of claim must be served upon the Attorney General either personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested (see Spaight v State of New York, 91 AD3d 995, 995 [2012]; Femminella v State of New York, 71 AD3d 1319, 1320 [2010]). Here, claimant’s substituted manner of service — priority mail— did not strictly comply with the statutory requirements (see Femminella v State of New York, 71 AD3d at 1320; Filozof v State of New York, 45 AD3d 1405, 1406 [2007]; Hodge v State of New York, 213 AD2d 766, 767 [1995]; Newman v State of New York, 5 Misc 3d 640, 642 [2004]). That failure “divests the court *944of subject matter jurisdiction,” and, therefore, dismissal of the claim was required (Caci v State of New York, 107 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2013] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; accord Kolnacki v State of New York, 8 NY3d 277, 281 [2007]). As a result, we need not reach the alternative grounds for dismissal advanced by defendant.

Peters, P.J., Lahtinen and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.