DeFoe v. Bankers Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeFoe v. Bankers Trust Co.

179 A.D.2d 737, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 699

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 21, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 179 A.D.2d 737 (DeFoe v. Bankers Trust Co.) 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

DeFoe v. Bankers Trust Co., 179 A.D.2d 737, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in imposing sanctions and costs because of the frivo[738]*738lous conduct of the appellant’s trial attorneys in interfering with the plaintiff’s right to photograph the accident site (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c] [2]; Odette Realty Co. v DiBianco, 170 AD2d 299, 301; Harley v Druzba, 169 AD2d 1001, 1003; Dellafiora v Dellafiora, 172 AD2d 715). However, since the plaintiff sought sanctions against the appellant’s trial counsel, and the record establishes that it was trial counsel who committed the frivolous conduct, we modify the order to direct that the attorneys personally, rather than the appellant, shall pay the sanctions and costs (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 — 130-1.3; cf., Matter of Minister, Elders & Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 76 NY2d 411). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in imposing sanctions and costs because of the frivo[738]*738lous conduct of the appellant’s trial attorneys in interfering with the plaintiff’s right to photograph the accident site (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c] [2]; Odette Realty Co. v DiBianco, 170 AD2d 299, 301; Harley v Druzba, 169 AD2d 1001, 1003; Dellafiora v Dellafiora, 172 AD2d 715). However, since the plaintiff sought sanctions against the appellant’s trial counsel, and the record establishes that it was trial counsel who committed the frivolous conduct, we modify the order to direct that the attorneys personally, rather than the appellant, shall pay the sanctions and costs (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 — 130-1.3; cf., Matter of Minister, Elders & Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 76 NY2d 411). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 A.D.2d 737, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/defoe-v-bankers-trust-co-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack