From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Krajca v. Panza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 28, 1999
262 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted May 19, 1999

June 28, 1999

In an action to recover on a guaranty, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), dated August 3, 1998, which granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 for failure to provide discovery.

Ted J. Tanenbaum Associates, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Ted J. Tanenbaum of counsel), for appellant.

Charles P. DeMartin, Huntington, N.Y. (Patricia Gallagher-Bansbach of counsel), for respondent.

SONDRA MILLER, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The nature and degree of the penalty to be imposed pursuant to CPLR 3126 is a matter within the discretion of the trial court ( see, Associated Mut. Ins. Co. v. Dyland Tavern, 105 A.D.2d 892). While the drastic remedy of striking a pleading for failure to disclose should not be imposed unless the party's failure to comply was the result of willful, deliberate, and contumacious conduct or its equivalent ( see, Beard v. Peconic Foam Insulation Corp., 149 A.D.2d 555), the record supports the Supreme Court's conclusion that the plaintiff's failure in this case warranted dismissal of the complaint.


Summaries of

Krajca v. Panza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 28, 1999
262 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Krajca v. Panza

Case Details

Full title:JOSEF KRAJCA, appellant, v. THOMAS PANZA, respondent

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

Date published: Jun 28, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
693 N.Y.S.2d 185