Goldberg v. Active Fire Sprinkler Corp.

Full title: THEODORE L. GOLDBERG et al., Respondents, v. ACTIVE FIRE SPRINKLER CORP.…

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

Date published: Jun 28, 1993

194 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

599 N.Y.S.2d 1010

Opinion

June 28, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.).

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment is granted, and the demand for punitive damages is stricken.

The plaintiffs, judgment creditors, alleged that the willful noncompliance with an information subpoena and an income execution by the defendant, the alleged employer of the judgment debtor, entitled them to $6,219.38 in damages, the entire amount of the judgment, plus $200,000 in punitive damages. The Supreme Court denied the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought punitive damages. We disagree.

Assuming the truth of the plaintiffs' allegations, the defendant's conduct would not warrant an award of punitive damages (see, James v. Powell, 19 N.Y.2d 249; Walker v. Sheldon, 10 N.Y.2d 401). Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.