Gordon v. Dirks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gordon v. Dirks

288 A.D.2d 108, 733 N.Y.S.2d 339, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11091

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

DecidedNovember 20, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 288 A.D.2d 108 (Gordon v. Dirks) 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

Gordon v. Dirks, 288 A.D.2d 108, 733 N.Y.S.2d 339, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11091 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered on or about July 7, 2000, which, in pertinent part, dismissed plaintiffs’ punitive damages claim against defendants and granted defendants’ motion for sanctions of $1,000, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of vacating the sanctions, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

In this action seeking, inter alia, punitive damages, plaintiffs asserted that defendants wrongfully denied them access to a storage closet they had leased and refused to return certain property contained therein. Supreme Court dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages and imposed sanctions upon them for asserting a frivolous cause of action. While we agree with Supreme Court that defendants’ conduct was not sufficiently egregious to support a claim for punitive damages (see, Seynaeve v Hudson Moving & Stor., 261 AD2d 168), we disagree that the imposition of sanctions was warranted under the circumstances presented. In view of this, we vacate only so much of the court’s order that imposed sanctions upon plaintiffs. Concur — Tom, J. P., Mazzarelli, Wallach, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered on or about July 7, 2000, which, in pertinent part, dismissed plaintiffs’ punitive damages claim against defendants and granted defendants’ motion for sanctions of $1,000, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of vacating the sanctions, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

In this action seeking, inter alia, punitive damages, plaintiffs asserted that defendants wrongfully denied them access to a storage closet they had leased and refused to return certain property contained therein. Supreme Court dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages and imposed sanctions upon them for asserting a frivolous cause of action. While we agree with Supreme Court that defendants’ conduct was not sufficiently egregious to support a claim for punitive damages (see, Seynaeve v Hudson Moving & Stor., 261 AD2d 168), we disagree that the imposition of sanctions was warranted under the circumstances presented. In view of this, we vacate only so much of the court’s order that imposed sanctions upon plaintiffs. Concur — Tom, J. P., Mazzarelli, Wallach, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 108, 733 N.Y.S.2d 339, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11091, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-dirks-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack