Gavrielatos v. Vienna Hotel

31 A.D.3d 496, 817 N.Y.S.2d 530
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 11, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dillon, J), dated August 19, 2005, which, upon an order of the same court entered May 25, 2005, conditionally granting the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3126 to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with discovery, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The conditional order of dismissal became absolute as a result of the plaintiffs failure to comply with its terms (see Echevarria v Pathmark Stores, Inc., 7 AD3d 750, 751 [2004]; Hall v Penas, 5 AD3d 549 [2004]; Marrone v Orson Holding Corp., 302 AD2d 371 [2003]; Stewart v City of New York, 266 AD2d 452 [1999]). The plaintiff failed to make a sufficient showing to be relieved of the adverse impact of the conditional order (see Echevarria v Pathmark Stores, Inc., supra; Hall v Penas, supra; Marrone v Orson Holding Corp., supra; Stewart v City of New York, supra). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in entering judgment upon the conditional order, dismissing the complaint (see CPLR 3042 [d]; 3126). Schmidt, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Skelos and Lunn, JJ., concur.

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

Gavrielatos v. Vienna Hotel, 31 A.D.3d 496, 817 N.Y.S.2d 530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

31 A.D.3d 496 (Gavrielatos v. Vienna Hotel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wei Hong Hu v. Sadiqi
83 A.D.3d 820 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)