Delaney v. Automated Bread Corp.
This text of 110 A.D.2d 677 (Delaney v. Automated Bread Corp.) 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.
Opinion
[678]*678The penalty of striking a pleading for failure to comply with an order of disclosure (CPLR 3126 [3]) is an extreme one which is warranted only where the failure has been willful or contumacious (Bassett v Bando Sangsa Co., 103 AD2d 728; Oppenheim & Macnow v Worth, 103 AD2d 687; Joseph v Roller Castle, 100 AD2d 839; Battaglia v Hofmeister, 100 AD2d 833; cf. Baumann v Dee, 100 AD2d 504). Under the facts and circumstances of this . case, we conclude that defendant should be granted one final opportunity to comply with the discovery order within the time we have prescribed (Joseph v Roller Castle, supra).
In the event defendant fails to so comply, its answer shall be stricken. Titone, J. P., Bracken, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 A.D.2d 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delaney-v-automated-bread-corp-nyappdiv-1985.