Sajid v. Tribeca North Associates L. P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sajid v. Tribeca North Associates L. P.

262 A.D.2d 158, 691 N.Y.S.2d 522, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6726

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

DecidedJune 17, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 158 (Sajid v. Tribeca North Associates L. P.) 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

Sajid v. Tribeca North Associates L. P., 262 A.D.2d 158, 691 N.Y.S.2d 522, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6726 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order,- Supreme Court, New York County (Franklin Weissberg, J.), entered January 20, 1999, which directed defendants to pay $5,000 to plaintiff’s attorneys as a disclosure sanction, unanimously modified, on the facts, to reduce the sanction to $1,000, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered January 20, 1999, which declined to entertain defendants’ application to vacate the $5,000 sanction, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

While we agree with the motion court that defendants should be sanctioned for willful noncompliance with a prior disclosure order, the amount of the sanction is excessive, and we modify [159]*159accordingly. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Tom, Wallach 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 (Franklin Weissberg, J.), entered January 20, 1999, which directed defendants to pay $5,000 to plaintiff’s attorneys as a disclosure sanction, unanimously modified, on the facts, to reduce the sanction to $1,000, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered January 20, 1999, which declined to entertain defendants’ application to vacate the $5,000 sanction, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

While we agree with the motion court that defendants should be sanctioned for willful noncompliance with a prior disclosure order, the amount of the sanction is excessive, and we modify [159]*159accordingly. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 158, 691 N.Y.S.2d 522, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6726, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sajid-v-tribeca-north-associates-l-p-nyappdiv-1999.