Opinion
2001-06790
Submitted September 10, 2002.
October 1, 2002.
In an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15 to compel the determination of a claim to real property, the plaintiff appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated May 11, 2001, which, inter alia, granted the motion of the defendant Neerg Second Corp. to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it pursuant to CPLR 3126.
George B. Headley, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.
Mulholland Knapp, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Robert P. Knapp III of counsel), for respondents.
Before: SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
When a party's failure to comply with disclosure orders is willful, deliberate, and contumacious, it is within the trial court's discretion to dismiss that party's pleading (see Kihl v. Pfeffer, 94 N.Y.2d 118, 122; Abouzeid v. Cadogan, 291 A.D.2d 423; Lones v. Lampeas, 270 A.D.2d 317). Here, the plaintiff repeatedly failed to comply with the Supreme Court's directives regarding disclosure. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in dismissing the complaint.
In light of our determination, we need not reach the plaintiff's remaining contentions.
FEUERSTEIN, J.P., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.