Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/B.E.N. Trading Corp. v. Shirley Import, Inc.

B.E.N. Trading Corp. v. Shirley Import, Inc.

68 A.D.3d 629, 890 N.Y.2d 323
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 22, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 68 A.D.3d 629 (B.E.N. Trading Corp. v. Shirley Import, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
B.E.N. Trading Corp. v. Shirley Import, Inc., 68 A.D.3d 629, 890 N.Y.2d 323 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

[630]*630Defendants’ failure to offer a reasonable excuse for their noncompliance with discovery demands, court orders and the court’s rules gives rise to an inference of willful and contumacious conduct (Siegman v Rosen, 270 AD2d 14, 15 [2000]). The striking of their answer and third-party complaint was a proper exercise of judicial discretion in light of such conduct (CPLR 3126; see Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118, 123 [1999]). Concur— Sweeny, J.P., Catterson, Renwick, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Related

Fish & Richardson, P.C. v. Schindler
75 A.D.3d 219 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 A.D.3d 629, 890 N.Y.2d 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ben-trading-corp-v-shirley-import-inc-nyappdiv-2009.