DeRiggi v. Brady

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeRiggi v. Brady

68 A.D.3d 487, 888 N.Y.2d 891

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

DecidedDecember 8, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 68 A.D.3d 487 (DeRiggi v. Brady) 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

DeRiggi v. Brady, 68 A.D.3d 487, 888 N.Y.2d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendants’ unexplained failure to comply with several disclosure orders, the last of which explicitly advised that defendants’ answer would be struck if compliance were not forthcoming, was willful and contumacious and warranted the extreme sanction of striking of their answer (see Zletz v Wetanson, 67 NY2d 711 [1986]; Helms v Gangemi, 265 AD2d 203, 204 [1999]). We have considered defendants’ other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Defendants’ unexplained failure to comply with several disclosure orders, the last of which explicitly advised that defendants’ answer would be struck if compliance were not forthcoming, was willful and contumacious and warranted the extreme sanction of striking of their answer (see Zletz v Wetanson, 67 NY2d 711 [1986]; Helms v Gangemi, 265 AD2d 203, 204 [1999]). We have considered defendants’ other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.3d 487, 888 N.Y.2d 891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deriggi-v-brady-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack