From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rotter King v. Timko Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 2011
83 A.D.3d 613 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 4935N.

April 28, 2011.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane S. Solomon, J.), entered January 12, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, held that plaintiff waived its right to certain discovery and issued a conditional order of preclusion against plaintiff, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs and the order vacated.

Clausen Miller P.C., New York (Jeffrey W. Varcadipane of counsel), for appellant.

Law Offices of Sanford F. Young, P.C., New York (Sanford F. Young of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.


The court's imposition of discovery sanctions pursuant to CPLR 3126 against plaintiff was improper, since plaintiff had not been afforded notice that such sanctions could result ( see Cherokee Owners Corp. v DNA Contr, LLC, 74 AD3d 411, 411-412; Warner v Houghton, 43 AD3d 376, aff'd 10 NY3d 913; see also Allstate Ins. Co. v Buziashvili, 71 AD3d 571). Plaintiffs conduct was not willful, contumacious or undertaken in bad faith ( see Campione v New Hampshire Ins. Co., 76 AD3d 484), and there was no pattern of willful noncompliance with discovery obligations ( cf. Bryant v New York City Hous. Auth., 69 AD3d 488, 489).


Summaries of

Rotter King v. Timko Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 2011
83 A.D.3d 613 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Rotter King v. Timko Rodriguez

Case Details

Full title:RIPKA ROTTER KING, LLP, Appellant, v. KAHN GORDON TIMKO RODRIGUEZ, P.C.…

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

Date published: Apr 28, 2011

Citations

83 A.D.3d 613 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3347
921 N.Y.S.2d 848

Citing Cases

Lawrence v. 239 E. 115th St. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.

"To invoke the drastic remedy of preclusion, the Supreme Court must determine that the offending party's lack…