Arnoff v. Lorio

208 A.D.2d 581, 618 N.Y.S.2d 218
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 11, 1994·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In a matrimonial action, the defendant appeals, as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated January 4, 1993, as granted the branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was to strike the answer pursuant to CPLR 3126.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Upon our review of the record, we agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant’s failure to appear for a deposition, despite two previous court orders compelling her to do so, was willful and contumacious. Thus, the court was justified in striking the answer (see, CPLR 3126 [3]; Fucci v Fucci, 166 AD2d 551). Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arnoff v. Lorio, 208 A.D.2d 581, 618 N.Y.S.2d 218 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

208 A.D.2d 581 (Arnoff v. Lorio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dillon v. Dillon
222 A.D.2d 645 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Owolabi v. Fairview Nursing Home, Inc.
209 A.D.2d 678 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)