Opinion
652 CA 19-01164
08-20-2020
Paula L. GIBBS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent.
PAULA L. GIBBS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT PRO SE. MURA & STORM, PLLC, BUFFALO (JERRY MARTI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
PAULA L. GIBBS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT PRO SE.
MURA & STORM, PLLC, BUFFALO (JERRY MARTI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, BANNISTER, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted the motion of defendant seeking the imposition of sanctions against plaintiff and denied plaintiff's request that sanctions be imposed against defendant and its counsel. Contrary to plaintiff's contention, we conclude that Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a sanction against plaintiff for her frivolous conduct in disregarding its order settling the record for another appeal (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c] [1]; Place v. Chaffee-Sardinia Volunteer Fire Co. , 143 A.D.3d 1271, 1272, 39 N.Y.S.3d 568 [4th Dept. 2016] ; Vacation Vil. Homeowners' Assn. v. Mordkofsky , 265 A.D.2d 746, 746-747, 698 N.Y.S.2d 739 [3d Dept. 1999], appeal dismissed 94 N.Y.2d 898, 707 N.Y.S.2d 143, 728 N.E.2d 339 [2000] ). We further conclude that the court did not err in denying plaintiff's request for sanctions. Plaintiff "did not make a proper motion for such relief" ( Nicit v. Nicit , 181 A.D.2d 1046, 1047, 583 N.Y.S.2d 858 [4th Dept. 1992] ; see CPLR 2214, 2215 ; 22 NYCRR 130.1 -1 [d] ) and, in any event, plaintiff's contention that the court abused its discretion in denying her request for the imposition of sanctions against defendant and its counsel, to the extent that it is properly before us in the context of this appeal, is without merit (see Amherst Magnetic Imaging Assoc. v. Community Blue, HMO of Blue Cross of W. N.Y. , 286 A.D.2d 896, 898, 730 N.Y.S.2d 639 [4th Dept. 2001], lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 612, 742 N.Y.S.2d 605, 769 N.E.2d 352 [2002] ; Peck v. Voss , 265 A.D.2d 890, 891, 696 N.Y.S.2d 730 [4th Dept. 1999] ).