Zimmon v. Somers

224 A.D.2d 258, 638 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998

This text of 224 A.D.2d 258 (Zimmon v. Somers) 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
Zimmon v. Somers, 224 A.D.2d 258, 638 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered May 16, 1995, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the court’s sua sponte dismissal of the action for failure to respond to defendants’ interrogatories and discovery demands, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The willfulness of plaintiffs’ failure to disclose can be inferred from the numerous opportunities they had over a five-year period to respond to defendants’ demands for disclosure and the absence of an excuse for such failure (see, Wolford v Cerrone, 184 AD2d 833; Meyer v Southampton Art Partners, 199 AD2d 222). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

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

Related

Wolford v. Cerrone
184 A.D.2d 833 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Meyer v. Southampton Art Partners, Inc.
199 A.D.2d 222 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
224 A.D.2d 258, 638 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zimmon-v-somers-nyappdiv-1996.