From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valentino v. Romero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 23, 1998

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in conditionally granting the motion and cross motion to strike the appellant's answer since the appellant has disappeared or made himself unavailable for scheduled examinations before trial ( see, Cavallino v. Sonsky, 251 A.D.2d 361; Dash v. DK Tr., 239 A.D.2d 313; Rowe v. Lee Gee Sook, 224 A.D.2d 404; Boera v. Batz, 236 A.D.2d 349; Spataro v. Ervin, 186 A.D.2d 793).

Mangano, P. J., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Valentino v. Romero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 23, 1998
255 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Valentino v. Romero

Case Details

Full title:MARIE VALENTINO, Respondent, v. CESAR ROMERO, Appellant, and JEFFREY…

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

Date published: Nov 23, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
680 N.Y.S.2d 176

Citing Cases

Hamilton v. Ocean Mgmt. Realty Corp.

ORDERED that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs. Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme…

Delanuez v. City Ok N.Y.

In his cross motion, dated April 17, 2015, Plaintiff maintains that Defendants' Answer should be stricken…