Rakauskas v. Grace Olivia, LLC
This text of 29 A.D.3d 355 (Rakauskas v. Grace Olivia, LLC) 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered December 5, 2005, striking defendants’ answer for noncompliance with their disclosure obligations, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Defendants’ noncompliance with the Special Referee’s repeated directives to produce the QuickBooks data was willful and contumacious and warrants the striking of their answer (CPLR 3126). Even at the final conference with the Special Referee, at which defendants produced a CD-R for the first time, the information was contained in Excel-format summary documents, not the raw, detailed QuickBooks format they were advised was necessary. Absent a motion to vacate the instant order, defendants will not be heard to argue that the court [356]*356improperly decided a motion that was not made on notice (cf. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc. v Enviropower, LLC, 21 AD3d 855 [2005], appeal dismissed 6 NY3d 750 [2005]). We note that the Special Referee repeatedly advised defendants that she would recommend the striking of their answer if they did not produce the QuickBooks data (see id.). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Williams, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 A.D.3d 355, 813 N.Y.S.2d 657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rakauskas-v-grace-olivia-llc-nyappdiv-2006.