ZOLL v. NEW YORK CITY OFF TRACK BETTING CORPORATION (1999)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered April 20, 1998, which, upon the prior grant of defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a), dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 The complaint herein, seeking damages for defendant's alleged miscalculation of plaintiff's race track winnings, was properly dismissed since the notice of claim upon which maintenance of the action is conditioned (see, Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law § 618;  Justy v. New York City Off-Track Betting Corp., 199 A.D.2d 190, 605 N.Y.S.2d 289, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 758, 615 N.Y.S.2d 875, 639 N.E.2d 416) was defective.   Although plaintiff's claim for relief ultimately sounds in breach of contract-each winning bet giving rise to a distinct contract claim-plaintiff's notice of claim wholly fails to identify the breaches for which he would recover;  it completely fails to specify the dates of the allegedly miscomputed winnings, the tracks where those winnings occurred or the horses and races involved.   Accordingly, plaintiff's notice of claim is deficient pursuant to Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law § 618(2)(c).   Moreover, contrary to plaintiff's contention, his failure to serve a sufficient notice of claim is not excusable in the public interest since his action merely seeks redress for a series of private contractual wrongs (see, Matter of Cayuga-Onondaga Counties Bd. of Cooperative Educational Servs. v. Sweeney, 89 N.Y.2d 395, 654 N.Y.S.2d 92, 676 N.E.2d 854).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.