Hernandez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hernandez v. City of New York

43 A.D.3d 868, 841 N.Y.S.2d 376

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

DecidedSeptember 11, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.3d 868 (Hernandez v. City of New York) 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

Hernandez v. City of New York, 43 A.D.3d 868, 841 N.Y.S.2d 376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion, inter alia, to strike the defendants’ answer as a sanction for the alleged spoliation of evidence. The subject clothing was not destroyed or lost, and the plaintiff has not been deprived of evidence necessary to make out a prima facie case (see Denoyelles v Gallagher, 40 AD3d 1027 [2007]; Iannucci v Rose, 8 AD3d 437, 438 [2004]). Schmidt, J.E, Goldstein, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion, inter alia, to strike the defendants’ answer as a sanction for the alleged spoliation of evidence. The subject clothing was not destroyed or lost, and the plaintiff has not been deprived of evidence necessary to make out a prima facie case (see Denoyelles v Gallagher, 40 AD3d 1027 [2007]; Iannucci v Rose, 8 AD3d 437, 438 [2004]). Schmidt, J.E, Goldstein, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 868, 841 N.Y.S.2d 376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hernandez-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack