Jenkins v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jenkins v. City of New York

24 A.D.3d 516, 805 N.Y.S.2d 285

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jenkins v. City of New York. Read the opinion of the Court — 2 A.D.3d 291 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 12, 2005·Published

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for false arrest and malicious prosecution, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated December 8, 2004, which denied their motion to strike the defendants’ answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The record does not demonstrate that the defendants willfully and contumaciously failed to comply with discovery demands. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion to strike the answer (see Ciandolo v Trism Specialized, Carriers, 274 AD2d 369, 370 [2000]; Vancott v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 271 AD2d 438 [2000]; Brown v United Christian Evangelistic Assn., 270 AD2d 378, 379 [2000]). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro, Spolzino and Lunn, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for false arrest and malicious prosecution, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated December 8, 2004, which denied their motion to strike the defendants’ answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The record does not demonstrate that the defendants willfully and contumaciously failed to comply with discovery demands. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion to strike the answer (see Ciandolo v Trism Specialized, Carriers, 274 AD2d 369, 370 [2000]; Vancott v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 271 AD2d 438 [2000]; Brown v United Christian Evangelistic Assn., 270 AD2d 378, 379 [2000]). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro, Spolzino and Lunn, JJ., concur.

Jenkins v. City of New York, 24 A.D.3d 516, 805 N.Y.S.2d 285 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

24 A.D.3d 516 (Jenkins v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related