Hashmall v. J. I. Sopher & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hashmall v. J. I. Sopher & Co.

97 A.D.2d 732, 469 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20460

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

DecidedNovember 22, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 A.D.2d 732 (Hashmall v. J. I. Sopher & 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

Hashmall v. J. I. Sopher & Co., 97 A.D.2d 732, 469 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20460 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred M. Ascione, J.), entered on April 5, 1983, directing a default judgment be entered against defendant-appellant and severing the action with respect to the other defendants, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of conditioning the grant of such motion upon the payment by the appellant to plaintiff’s attorney of $250 costs and service of fully responsive answers to the interrogatories in issue within 20 days of entry of the order to be settled herein and, as thus modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs. Upon failure to comply with the foregoing, the order is affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. Although the failure of the defendant J. I. Sopher & Co., Inc., to respond in a timely fashion to four of the interrogatories served on it, and the inadequate nature of the responses, merit criticism, we are not persuaded under all the circumstances that the drastic remedy of entering a default judgment is presently warranted. Accordingly, we extend a final opportunity to Sopher to respond appropriately after payment of $250 in costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Bloom, Fein, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred M. Ascione, J.), entered on April 5, 1983, directing a default judgment be entered against defendant-appellant and severing the action with respect to the other defendants, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of conditioning the grant of such motion upon the payment by the appellant to plaintiff’s attorney of $250 costs and service of fully responsive answers to the interrogatories in issue within 20 days of entry of the order to be settled herein and, as thus modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs. Upon failure to comply with the foregoing, the order is affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. Although the failure of the defendant J. I. Sopher & Co., Inc., to respond in a timely fashion to four of the interrogatories served on it, and the inadequate nature of the responses, merit criticism, we are not persuaded under all the circumstances that the drastic remedy of entering a default judgment is presently warranted. Accordingly, we extend a final opportunity to Sopher to respond appropriately after payment of $250 in costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Bloom, Fein, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 A.D.2d 732, 469 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hashmall-v-j-i-sopher-co-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack