Williamson v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Williamson v. City of New York

249 A.D.2d 248, 671 N.Y.S.2d 653, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4783

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 30, 1998·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered February 27, 1997, which granted plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s answer for disclosure noncompliance, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s alleged good faith efforts are belied by its repeated failure to produce the witness for any of the three court-ordered deposition dates spanning a period of two years (see, Periphery Loungewear v Kantron Roofing Corp., 214 AD2d 438), and its excuses are insufficient to establish a reasonable basis for its noncompliance (see, Furniture Fantasy v Cerrone, 154 AD2d 506). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered February 27, 1997, which granted plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s answer for disclosure noncompliance, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s alleged good faith efforts are belied by its repeated failure to produce the witness for any of the three court-ordered deposition dates spanning a period of two years (see, Periphery Loungewear v Kantron Roofing Corp., 214 AD2d 438), and its excuses are insufficient to establish a reasonable basis for its noncompliance (see, Furniture Fantasy v Cerrone, 154 AD2d 506). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Williamson v. City of New York, 249 A.D.2d 248, 671 N.Y.S.2d 653, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4783 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

249 A.D.2d 248 (Williamson v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related