Amato v. County of Westchester

• Decision Date: 20 October 1997
• Citation: 663 N.Y.S.2d 264,243 A.D.2d 593
• Parties: Michael AMATO, et al., Appellants, v. COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 264

663 N.Y.S.2d 264

243 A.D.2d 593

Michael AMATO, et al., Appellants, v. COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Oct. 20, 1997.

Barrett G. Kreisberg, New York City (Charles Palella, of counsel), for appellants.

Schiavetti, Geisler, Corgan, Soscia, DeVito, Gabriele and Nicholson, White Plains (Dena T. Berke, of counsel; Steven H. Mutz, on the brief), for respondents.

Before MILLER, J.P., and RITTER, SULLIVAN, SANTUCCI and McGINITY, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J.), entered November 14, 1996, which granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against the County defendants pursuant to CPLR 3126. The plaintiffs exhibited willful and contumacious conduct in failing to comply with repeated demands for disclosure and depositions (see, Zletz v. Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 713, 499 N.Y.S.2d 933, 490 N.E.2d 852; Polito v. DeTomaso, 208 A.D.2d 912, 618 N.Y.S.2d 575; Wolfson v. Nassau County Med. Center, 141 A.D.2d 815, 530 N.Y.S.2d 27). Furthermore, we agree with the result reached by the Supreme Court in dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint insofar as it is asserted against the defendant Zalman Arlin, albeit on the different ground that the court does not have personal jurisdiction over that defendant (see, CPLR 3211[a][8] ).