From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sandra v. New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 29, 2008
47 A.D.3d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

January 29, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul Victor, J.), entered October 24, 2006, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, confirmed the recommendation of a judicial hearing officer to deny plaintiff's motion to strike the answers of defendants City of New York, Joseph Richardson and Steven Fischer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.


The drastic remedy of striking defendants' answers was properly denied for lack of a clear showing that defendants' failure to comply with the court's prior discovery orders was willful or contumacious ( see CPLR 3126; see also Frye v City of New York, 228 AD2d 182; Dauria v City of New York, 127 AD2d 459). The record evidence demonstrates that defendant City offered a reasonable excuse for its failure to produce several retired officers for depositions, that defendant Richardson appeared for his deposition, and that the circumstances presented do not warrant the striking of defendant Fischer's answer.


Summaries of

Sandra v. New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 29, 2008
47 A.D.3d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Sandra v. New York

Case Details

Full title:SANDRA DELGADO, Individually and as Mother and Natural Guardian of JUAN…

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

Date published: Jan 29, 2008

Citations

47 A.D.3d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
850 N.Y.S.2d 401

Citing Cases

Thomas v. 215 E. 68TH St., L.P.

This includes not only admissible material, but also "matter that may lead to the disclosure of admissible…

Suero-Che v. 1407 Broadway, LLC

then failed to communicate with their adversaries regarding the scheduled depositions. Significantly, "the…