Sonmez v. World on Columbus, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sonmez v. World on Columbus, Inc.

261 A.D.2d 199, 689 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5307

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

DecidedMay 13, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 199 (Sonmez v. World on Columbus, Inc.) 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

Sonmez v. World on Columbus, Inc., 261 A.D.2d 199, 689 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5307 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered June 29, 1998, which granted the motion of defendants to strike the Sonmez’s complaint and the answer of the third-party defendant, and dismissed said pleadings with prejudice, deemed to be an appeal from the judgment entered thereon on August 21, 1998, and so considered, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The Sonmez’s complaint and the answer of third-party defendant LCK Restaurant Group, Inc., an entity controlled by plaintiff Kemal Sonmez, were properly struck pursuant to CPLR 3126 by reason of Kemal Sonmez’s deliberate destruction of financial records crucial to the defense of the action (see, Hyosung [Am.] v Woodcrest Fabrics, 106 AD2d 298, appeal dismissed 64 NY2d 934). Also supportive of the motion court’s determination to strike the pleadings was Kemal Sonmez’s evidently willful refusal to produce other relevant records demanded by defendants and his failure to respond to questions regarding his stock ownership in World on Columbus, Inc., the corporation on behalf of which he purported to sue (see, Ricco v Deepdale Gardens Apts. Corp., 113 AD2d 822). Plaintiffs were not entitled to a fact-finding hearing to determine the nature of documents they wrongfully discarded. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Tom, Lerner, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered June 29, 1998, which granted the motion of defendants to strike the Sonmez’s complaint and the answer of the third-party defendant, and dismissed said pleadings with prejudice, deemed to be an appeal from the judgment entered thereon on August 21, 1998, and so considered, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The Sonmez’s complaint and the answer of third-party defendant LCK Restaurant Group, Inc., an entity controlled by plaintiff Kemal Sonmez, were properly struck pursuant to CPLR 3126 by reason of Kemal Sonmez’s deliberate destruction of financial records crucial to the defense of the action (see, Hyosung [Am.] v Woodcrest Fabrics, 106 AD2d 298, appeal dismissed 64 NY2d 934). Also supportive of the motion court’s determination to strike the pleadings was Kemal Sonmez’s evidently willful refusal to produce other relevant records demanded by defendants and his failure to respond to questions regarding his stock ownership in World on Columbus, Inc., the corporation on behalf of which he purported to sue (see, Ricco v Deepdale Gardens Apts. Corp., 113 AD2d 822). Plaintiffs were not entitled to a fact-finding hearing to determine the nature of documents they wrongfully discarded. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Tom, Lerner, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 199, 689 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sonmez-v-world-on-columbus-inc-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack