From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Umans v. Tomfar Transportation, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 12, 2004
9 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-03750.

July 12, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), entered March 7, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict, and upon an order of the same court (Milano, J.), dated May 29, 2001, denying that branch of her motion which was to strike the defendants' answer, is in favor of the defendants and against her.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Before: H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Cozier and Mastro, JJ., concur.


The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that the defendants' conduct during disclosure did not constitute willful or contumacious noncompliance warranting the imposition of a sanction pursuant to CPLR 3126 ( see Mylonas v. Town of Brookhaven, 305 AD2d 561; Marro v. St. Vincent's Hosp. Med. Ctr. of N.Y., 294 AD2d 341).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Umans v. Tomfar Transportation, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 12, 2004
9 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Umans v. Tomfar Transportation, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOANNE UMANS, Appellant, v. TOMFAR TRANSPORTATION, INC., Also Known as…

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

Date published: Jul 12, 2004

Citations

9 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
779 N.Y.S.2d 361

Citing Cases

Jenkins v. City of New York

The Supreme Court is vested with broad discretion in supervising disclosure, and its determination that the…

Indep. Temperature Control Servs., Inc. v. WDF, Inc.

Sanctions for spoliation therefore were not warranted (cf. Giuliano v 666 Old County Rd., LLC, 100 AD3d at…