From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Abouzeid v. Cadogan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 2002
291 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-04885

Submitted January 23, 2002.

February 14, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated February 16, 2001, which denied his motion to extend the time to comply with a disclosure order of the same court dated January 19, 2001, and dismissed the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126(3).

Wohlberg Wohlberg, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Alan J. Wohlberg of counsel), for appellant.

McCarthy, Small Associates, New York, N.Y. (Justin S. Blash of counsel), for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Where a party disobeys a court order, and by his conduct frustrates the disclosure scheme provided by the CPLR, dismissal of a pleading is within the broad discretion of the trial court (see, Kihl v. Pfeffer, 94 N.Y.2d 118, 122-123; Zletz v. Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 713; Castrignano v. Flynn, 255 A.D.2d 352, 353; Frias v. Fortini, 240 A.D.2d 467, 468). The plaintiff failed to comply with four court orders directing disclosure. The fourth order, dated January 19, 2001, was self-executing; and directed that the plaintiff either comply with the disclosure requirement within 21 days or his "complaint is stricken". The plaintiff moved to extend the time to comply with this order one day prior to the expiration of the 21-day; period. He did not seek a stay, however, of the direction to comply within the 21-day; period set forth in the order dated January 19, 2001. In his order to show cause, the plaintiff failed to present a valid excuse for his failure to abide by the court's previous disclosure orders. Therefore, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to extend the time to comply with the prior court order, and dismissing the complaint (see, Castrignano v. Flynn, supra, 255 A.D.2d at 353; Frias v. Fortini, supra, 240 A.D.2d at 468).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Abouzeid v. Cadogan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 2002
291 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Abouzeid v. Cadogan

Case Details

Full title:SAYED H. ABOUZEID, appellant, v. BOBBY G. CADOGAN, et al., respondents

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

Date published: Feb 14, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
737 N.Y.S.2d 634

Citing Cases

Zion Resurrection v. Neerg Second Corp.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs. When a party's failure to comply with disclosure…

Woolard v. Suffolk County Water Authority

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs. Where a party disobeys a court order and by his…