From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 7, 1998
250 A.D.2d 393 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 7, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.).


The motion court properly exercised its discretion in denying appellants' motion, however termed, since their failure to comply with three orders of discovery, which expressly warned of the consequences of non-compliance, or to respond to plaintiff's motion for a default judgment, evinced a willful neglect of, or, at best, a lack of concerned attention to the proceedings (see, Martinez v. Belanger, 186 A.D.2d 40, affd 82 N.Y.2d 672). Further, we note the absence of an affidavit of merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Smith v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 7, 1998
250 A.D.2d 393 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Smith v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MAUREEN D. SMITH, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants, et…

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

Date published: May 7, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 393 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 694

Citing Cases

Baez v. Ende Realty Corp.

See M.R. v. 2526 Valentine LLC, 58 A.D.3d 530, 871 N.Y.S.2d 131 (1st Dep't 2009). Furthermore, defendant's…

BAEZ v. ENDE REALTY CORP.

Furthermore, defendant's failure to maintain an accurate address for service of process with the Department…