From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

John v. Alfonso

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 2008
52 A.D.3d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

June 10, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alison Y. Tuitt, J.), entered April 6, 2007, which, in these personal injury actions arising from a multivehicle accident, granted the motions of plaintiff John Zeolla (Action No. 1, index No. 17045/04) and plaintiff George Garcia (Action No. 2, index No. 114250/04), pursuant to CPLR 3126, to strike the answers of defendants/third-party defendants Frank Inzano and Hilltop Service Station Co., Inc. for failure to comply with discovery orders, unanimously reversed, on the facts, without costs, the answers reinstated and the motions granted only to the extent of directing that the trial court give a negative inference charge against defendants.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Williams, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.


Defendants proffered a reasonable excuse for their failure to provide color copies of all the photographs ( see Catarine v Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 290 AD2d 213, 215-216). Affidavits by defendants' current attorneys and a paralegal in their office detailed the difficulty they experienced in obtaining the complete file from defendants' previous attorneys and the search they conducted for the missing photographs.

Further, the loss of the evidence does not deprive plaintiff's of the means of establishing their claims ( see Marro v St. Vincent's Hosp. Med. Ctr. of N.Y., 294 AD2d 341). Defendants provided plaintiff's with black and white copies of the missing photographs, and plaintiff's may offer direct testimony of the location of defendants' tow truck at the time of the accident.


Summaries of

John v. Alfonso

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 2008
52 A.D.3d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

John v. Alfonso

Case Details

Full title:JOHN ZEOLLA, Respondent, v. ALFONSO KIMCHE et al., Defendants, and FRANK…

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

Date published: Jun 10, 2008

Citations

52 A.D.3d 277 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
859 N.Y.S.2d 184

Citing Cases

Stoeckel v. Manocherian

It is Power Flame's burden to prove that the missing evidence is crucial or key and that its spoliation has…