Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the claimant's position, the Court of Claims did not err in dismissing the breach of contract claim as premature. The record reflects that the contract work had not been substantially performed on the date the claim was served (see, 13 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 37.132 [3d rev ed]) nor had the claimant requested final payment thereunder (see, Forest-Fehlhaber v State of New York, 74 A.D.2d 272). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.