From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Keefe v. Union-Dale Fire Dist. of Uniondale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1993
198 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 15, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, as a matter of discretion, the plaintiff's motion is granted in its entirety, and the answer of the defendant Uniondale Water District of the Town of Hempstead, along with the cross claim asserted therein, is stricken; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as cross-appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs, payable by the respondent-appellant.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to strike the answer of the defendant Uniondale Water District of the Town of Hempstead pursuant to CPLR 3126 because the respondent-appellant was aware of a prior order of the same court compelling the inspection of two temporary fire hydrants but nevertheless allowed them to be disassembled (see, Miller v County of Orange, 120 A.D.2d 713). The explanation provided in the affidavit of an employee of the respondent-appellant as to the loss of the evidence is not a reasonable one under the circumstances. Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Miller, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

O'Keefe v. Union-Dale Fire Dist. of Uniondale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1993
198 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

O'Keefe v. Union-Dale Fire Dist. of Uniondale

Case Details

Full title:JAMES P. O'KEEFE, JR., Appellant-Respondent, v. UNIONDALE FIRE DISTRICT OF…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
605 N.Y.S.2d 893