The following papers numbered 1-6 were read and considered by the Court on the State’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim and oral argument was heard by the Court on October 22, 2024: Notice of Motion, Attorney’s Supporting Affirmation, Affidavit of Sean Connolly and Exhibits 1 Attorney’s Affirmation in Opposition, Affirmation of Truth of Statement in Opposition of Jason Anderson and Exhibits 2 Claimant’s Letter Memorandum of Law dated July 10, 2024 3 Defendant’s Letter Memorandum of Law dated July 12, 2024 4 Claimant’s Letter Memorandum of Law dated July 19, 2024 5 Defendant’s Letter Memorandum of Law dated July 19, 2024 6 DECISION AND ORDER Background Notice of Intention to File a Claim A Notice of Intention to File a Claim was served upon the State on May 6, 2020 (State’s Ex. D). The Notice of Intention to File a Claim alleges negligence and trespass by State University of New York at Purchase (SUNY Purchase). It is alleged that SUNY Purchase allowed the runoff of contaminated soil and sediment onto the property located at 3100 Purchase Street, Purchase, New York, which is owned by claimant, Old Oaks Country Club, Inc. (Old Oaks). The runoff allegedly damaged Old Oaks’ property and the ponds on the property (id.). The runoff allegedly occurred “from on or about April 2019 through on or about at least February 4, 2020, and likely until March 31, 2020″ (id. at 2). It is further alleged that the runoff and damages were ongoing through March 31, 2020 (id. at 4). The Notice of Intention to File a Claim further alleges that on or about February 4, 2020, a representative of SUNY Purchase indicated that it had ongoing construction designed to excavate and replace large sections of damaged underground piping and that, upon information and belief, SUNY Purchase had replaced or wrapped 350 feet of piping and had created two sediment basins to remedy the ongoing runoff and damage to Old Oaks’ property (id. at 2). On or about February 4, 2020, the efforts to stop the runoff were substantially completed and SUNY Purchase intended to complete a two-part study of the sufficiency of its newly created retention basins by the end of February 2020. It is further alleged that SUNY Purchase accepted responsibility that the runoff of silt from its property was caused by its defective and damaged piping. As a result of the alleged negligence and trespass, the ponds near the twelfth and sixth holes of Old Oaks’ golf course, which ponds border SUNY Purchase, were the most affected by the bulk of the heavier silt that ran off from SUNY Purchase (id. at 5). The ponds downstream “(upper reservoir by Old Oaks’ halfway house and lower main irrigation pond)” were fouled with finer particles (id.). The silt accumulation in the ponds contaminated the irrigation system and degraded the new irrigation pumps requiring the ponds to be dredged to restore them to their condition prior to the runoff and requiring the irrigation pumps to be restored. The dredging and restoration work allegedly requires, inter alia, permitting, legal fees, insurance, bonding, excavation, and safeguarding the golf course during the work, at an approximate cost of $340, 000.00. Claim A claim alleging negligence and trespass was subsequently filed with the Court on April 27, 2021 and served upon the State on April 30, 2021 (State’s Ex. E, 3). The claim alleges that the runoff came from SUNY Purchase’s property located at 735 Anderson Hill Road, Purchase, New York, and traveled onto Old Oaks’ property located at 3100 Purchase Street, Purchase, New York, and its irrigation ponds. The claim, like the Notice of Intention to File a Claim, alleges that the runoff commenced “on or about April 2019″ and continued “through at least March 31, 2020″ (id. at 2 [a]). The claim further alleges that the “runoff continued intermittently through March 31, 2020 when SUNY Purchase completed repair and remediation to it[s] damaged underground pipes which SUNY Purchase represented was the cause of the runoff” (id. at 2 [b]). The claim also alleges that Old Oaks sustained damages to its property, including its irrigation ponds (id. at 3). Answer The State served and filed a Verified Answer on June 9, 2021 (Ex. F). The Verified Answer asserts the affirmative defenses of lack of jurisdiction based upon an untimely and insufficient Notice of Intention to File a Claim that did not extend the time within which to serve and file a claim. Specifically, it was asserted that the Notice of Intention to File a Claim does not set forth: a date of accrual; an adequate description of the location; a particularization of the nature of the cause of action and the State’s conduct in regard thereto (id. at
