From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Montgomery v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 11, 2003
307 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2003-00049

Submitted June 11, 2003.

August 11, 2003.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated December 12, 2002, which granted the defendants' motion to compel the plaintiff Francine Montgomery to appear for an examination before trial and for an independent medical examination pursuant to CPLR 3124, and denied their cross motion to impose a sanction pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.3.

Manoussos Associates, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Lorenzo V. Delillo, Albert J. Fiorella, and Lamont K. Rodgers of counsel), for appellants.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Marta Ross of counsel), for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is modified, by deleting the provision thereof granting the motion and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs.

While a defendant who defaults in appearing or answering is entitled to present testimony and evidence and to cross-examine a plaintiff's witnesses at the inquest on damages, such a defendant forfeits his or her right to conduct discovery in preparation for the inquest ( see Reynolds Securities v. Underwriters Bank Trust Co., 44 N.Y.2d 568, 573; Minicozzi v. Gerbino, 301 A.D.2d 580). Therefore, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants' motion.

The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' cross motion to impose a sanction pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.3 (see Wagner v. Goldberg, 293 A.D.2d 527).

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Montgomery v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 11, 2003
307 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Montgomery v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:FRANCINE MONTGOMERY, ET AL., appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Aug 11, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
763 N.Y.S.2d 477

Citing Cases

Kolonkowski v. Daily News, L.P.

Although “ ‘a defaulting defendant is entitled to present testimony and evidence and cross-examine the…

Christopulos v. Christopulos

Pisciotta v Lifestyle Designs, Inc., 62 A.D.3d 850 [2d Dept 2009]). As a result of his answer having been…