From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burgess v. Rainsford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1995
221 A.D.2d 399 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 13, 1995

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


Ordered that the appeal from the order dated January 11, 1995, and the appeal by the defendants Latorre, Matarazzo, Kenny, and "Doe" from the order dated August 9, 1994, are dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated August 9, 1994, is affirmed insofar as appealed from by the defendant Mercy Hospital; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiffs are awarded one bill of costs payable by the defendants Patricia R. Latorre, Janet Matarazzo, Catherine Kenny, "John and Jane Does Nos. 1-20", and Mercy Hospital.

The record shows that the failure of the appellant Mercy Hospital to comply with the court's order to meet the plaintiffs' discovery demands was willful, contumacious, and in bad faith. Under the circumstances, the court properly granted the plaintiffs' motion to strike its answer pursuant to CPLR 3126 (see, e.g., Rodriguez v All Am. Auto Rental, 179 A.D.2d 632; Ahroni v City of New York, 175 A.D.2d 789; Dauria v City of New York, 127 A.D.2d 459, 460; Sawh v Bridges, 120 A.D.2d 74, 78).

The appeal from the denial of the appellants' motion, denominated as a motion for renewal and reargument, must be dismissed. The motion is actually one for reargument as it was not based upon new facts unavailable at the time of the original motion (see, e.g., Huttner v McDaid, 151 A.D.2d 547). The denial of a motion for reargument is not appealable (see, e.g., Huttner v McDaid, supra; Mgrditchian v Donato, 141 A.D.2d 513).

We note that since the order dated August 9, 1994, did not dismiss the answer insofar as asserted by the defendants Latorre, Matarazzo, Kenny, and "Doe", they are not aggrieved by that order and may not appeal therefrom (see, CPLR 5511). Balletta, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Burgess v. Rainsford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1995
221 A.D.2d 399 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Burgess v. Rainsford

Case Details

Full title:KIM Y. BURGESS et al., Respondents, v. GRETA M. RAINSFORD et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 399 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
634 N.Y.S.2d 393

Citing Cases

Arcuri Sons, Inc. v. Alfonsi

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. While the dismissal of an action for failure to obey a…