From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jacobs v. Mostow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 2005
23 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2003-09473.

November 28, 2005.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winslow, J.), dated December 11, 2003, which, upon an order of the same court dated August 20, 2003, denying his motion, inter alia, to compel further discovery and, sua sponte, quashing certain nonparty subpoenas, dismissed the complaint.

David B. Jacobs, Freeport, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Jaspan Schlesinger Hoffman, LLP, Garden City, N.Y., for respondents Michael H. Mostow, Roosevelt Union Free School District, Board of Education of the Roosevelt Union Free School District, Glenn Simmons, Mark Davis, Marsha Bedard, Stephen Budhu, Rodney Romain, Hossein Zamani, Carolyn Ruffin, and Horace Williams.

Before: H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the complaint is reinstated, so much of the order dated August 20, 2003, as denied that branch of the motion which was to compel further discovery is vacated, the third decretal paragraph of the order dated August 20, 2003, is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a new determination of that branch of the motion which was to compel further discovery.

The Supreme Court erred in dismissing the complaint without notice to the parties and in the absence of an application by the defendants for such relief ( see Grimes v. Kaplin, 305 AD2d 1024; Gibbs v. Kinsey, 120 AD2d 701). The plaintiff was improperly deprived of the opportunity to submit any additional proof he might have in opposition to the dismissal of his complaint on the merits ( see Hoeffner v. John F. Frank, Inc., 302 AD2d 428, 430; Sena v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 198 AD2d 345, 346).

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court properly quashed the subpoenas duces tecum directed to Dr. Herschel Williams and attorney Lawrence Tenenbaum ( see CPLR 3103). Under the circumstances of this case, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a new determination of that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to compel further discovery.

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Jacobs v. Mostow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 2005
23 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Jacobs v. Mostow

Case Details

Full title:DAVID B. JACOBS, Appellant, v. MICHAEL H. MOSTOW et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 28, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 9072
806 N.Y.S.2d 213

Citing Cases

Jacobs v. Mostow

Plaintiff first brought an action in this court in 2001 ( Jacobs vMostow, et al., Index No. 01-4162). The…

Warren v. Mikle

"While the Supreme Court has the power to award summary judgment to a nonmoving party, predicated upon a…