Searching for "Abandoned Property" received by the State Comptroller

Pursuant to provisions of the Abandoned Property Law and related laws, the Office of the State Comptroller receives unclaimed monies and other property deemed abandoned. A list of the names and last known addresses of the entitled owners of this abandoned property is maintained by the office in accordance with Section 1401 of the Abandoned Property Law

Interested individuals and organizations may determine if their name appears on the Abandoned Property Listing by contacting the Office of Unclaimed Funds, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., at: 1-800-221-9311 or visit Department of Audit and Controls' web site by clicking HERE.

If you are searching for the name of a public entity or an employee organization, its name may be found among those listed. For example:

ALBANY COUNTY

C/O ALBANY COUNTY 112 STATE ST ROOM 800 ALBANY NY 12207

BANK OF AMERICA

CITY OF ROCHESTER

BUILDING SERVICES 414 ANDREWS STREET ROCHESTER NY

JOHNSON CONTROLS INC

CSEA INC LOCAL 1000

143 WASHINGTON AVE ATTN ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ALBANY NY 12210

DELL USA LP

BINGHAMTON CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

16 HAWLEY ST BINGHAMTOM NY 13902

SIEMENS USA HOLDINGS INC

Sometimes the name of the entity or organization may be truncated or "modified". For example:

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ALBANY		ACADEMY PARK ELK STREET ATTN ACCTS PAYA BLE ALBANY NY 12207				CDW LLC
SCHOOL DISTRICT OF J	905 MARCONI AVE RONKONKOMA NY 11779			STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
SCHOOL DISTRICT PUBLICATIONS			570 ELMONT ROAD ELMONT NY 11003		TURNER CORP

Claims for abandoned property must be filed with the New York State Comptroller’s Office of Unclaimed Funds as provided in Section 1406 of the Abandoned Property Law. 

For further information contact the Office of the State Comptroller, Office of Unclaimed Funds, 110 State St., Albany, NY 12236.

Terminating a probationary employee without a hearing

Supreme Court rejected Plaintiff's the petition to annul the determination of New York City Department of Education [DOE] which discontinued the Plaintiff's probationary employment as an assistant principal, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's ruling.

Appellate Division explained that the Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that her probationary employment as assistant principal was terminated in bad faith, in violation of a law, or for an impermissible reason. The record, said the court, showed that DOE discontinued Plaintiff's employment as a probationary employee because of her failure to comply with directives, complete assignments, and in consideration of a "two-year history of poor work performance."

Citing Childs v Board of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 176 AD3d 560, the Appellate Division noted that in the absence of a demonstration that a probationer's  discontinuance of employment was made in bad faith or in violation of the law, a probationary employee, may be discharged without a hearing.

Click HEREto access the text of the Appellate Division's decision.

 

Former Town of Beekman tax collector pleads guilty to embezzling $86,000 for personal expenses

On April 20, 2022 New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced that Jennifer Colucci, 41, of Hopewell Junction, pleaded guilty to stealing more than $86,000 in tax funds collected for the use of the Town of Beekman and its schools. This plea was a result of a joint investigation between Comptroller DiNapoli’s Office, the New York State Police and Dutchess County D.A. William Grady. 

“Ms. Colucci treated the Town’s treasury like her personal piggybank* and now faces the consequences of her actions,” DiNapoli said. “This case should be a warning to anyone contemplating a betrayal of the public’s trust: you will be held accountable for your actions. I thank Dutchess County D.A. William Grady and the State Police for their partnership in bringing this corruption to light and helping to combat abuse of taxpayers’ trust.”

“Jennifer Colucci put her greed ahead of the community these tax funds were meant to support,” State Police Superintendent Kevin P. Bruen said. “This guilty plea demonstrates the hard work of the New York State Police and our law enforcement partners. I commend and thank the State Comptroller’s Office and Dutchess County District Attorney’s Office for their commitment to investigating those who victimize the unsuspecting public for their own gain.”

Colucci pleaded guilty to Grand Larceny in the 4th Degree and Corrupting the Government in the 3rd Degree and was ordered to pay $86,389.62 in restitution in Dutchess County Court before Judge Edward T. McLoughlin. She is due back in court on June 17, 2022. 

Colucci used the Town’s money to shop online, order food deliveries, and make car loan payments. She served as Beekman tax collector for two years, ending in August 2020. 

* The practice of using a public office or position of trust for one's own gain or advantage is know as Jobbery.

###

Since taking office in 2007, DiNapoli has committed to fighting public corruption and encourages the public to help fight fraud and abuse. New Yorkers can report allegations of fraud involving taxpayer money by calling the toll-free Fraud Hotline at 1-888-672-4555, by filing a complaint online at investigations@osc.ny.gov, or by mailing a complaint to: Office of the State Comptroller, Division of Investigations, 8th Floor, 110 State St., Albany, NY 12236.

Corruption, fraud, or misconduct in procuring an arbitration award

Supreme Court denied a petition to confirm an arbitration award under color of CPLR §7511.  

§7511 of the CPLR provides, in pertinent part, that an "arbitration award shall be vacated if the court finds that the rights of the complaining party were prejudiced by corruption, fraud, or misconduct in procuring the award." Noting that "[a] party seeking to overturn an arbitration award bears a heavy burden and must establish a ground for vacatur by clear and convincing evidence," the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision.

Citing Goldfinger v Lisker, 68 NY2d at 232-233, the Appellate Division explained that there was "clear and convincing evidence" that the arbitrator committed misconduct and that such misconduct "prejudiced the [Responent's] rights or the integrity of the arbitration process."

Respondents had submitted an affirmation executed by the arbitrator in which the arbitrator "averred that almost a year after the end of the arbitration proceeding, he received information from the [Petitioner] and 'others speaking for' the [Petitioner]  concerning the work that was the subject of the arbitration," and "[b]ased on this information," the arbitrator decided to render the award at issue "without first providing the [R]espondents an opportunity to respond to the information."

In the words of the Appellate Division, "The arbitrator's admitted consideration of evidence received from one party, without providing the other party the opportunity to respond, along with evidence in the record of ex parte communications, established by clear and convincing evidence that the arbitrator committed prejudicial misconduct."

Click HEREto access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.