Bd. of Managers ex rel. Unit Owners of the 322 W. 57th St. Condo. v. Leardon Boiler Works, Inc.
Citation | 111 N.Y.S.3d 534 (Mem),178 A.D.3d 462 |
Decision Date | 05 December 2019 |
Docket Number | 10502,Index 150762/14 |
Parties | The BOARD OF MANAGERS ON BEHALF OF the UNIT OWNERS OF the 322 WEST 57TH STREET CONDOMINIUM, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. LEARDON BOILER WORKS, INC., et al., Defendants–Appellants, Rose Associates, Inc., et al., Defendants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Rawle & Henderson LLP, New York (Sylvia E. Lee of counsel), for appellants.
Asner LLC, New York (Karen M. Asner of counsel), for respondent.
Richter, J.P., Gische, Webber, Gesmer, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered June 18, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants Leardon Boiler Works, Inc. and Rite Way Tank Maintenance Corp.'s motion to vacate a prior order imposing an adverse inference sanction against Leardon Boiler Works, Inc., and expanding the prior order to impose the same sanction against Rite Way Tank Maintenance Corp., unanimously affirmed, without costs.
A determination of sanctions pursuant to CPLR 3126 lies in the trial court's discretion, and defendants failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering an adverse inference instruction against them at trial ( CPLR 3126 ; Husovic v. Structure Tone, Inc. , 171 A.D.3d 559, 560, 96 N.Y.S.3d 859 [1st Dept. 2019] ). The fact that the documents requested by plaintiff may have been produced by other parties does not excuse defendants' failure to produce them.
We have considered defendants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Deneen v. Bucknor
...radiologist, who noted degeneration and an encroaching spur in the cervical spine and found "[n]o acute process" in the lumbar spine (see 178 A.D.3d 462 Ortiz v. Boamah , 169 A.D.3d 486, 93 N.Y.S.3d 311 [1st Dept. 2019] ; Rivera v. Fernandez & Ulloa Auto Group , 123 A.D.3d 509, 999 N.Y.S.2d......
-
Manhattan Telecommunications Corp. v. Coburn & Meredith, Inc.
..."A determination of sanctions pursuant to CPLR 3126 lies in the trial court's discretion" (Board of Mgrs. v Leardon Boiler Works, Inc., 178 A.D.3d 462, 462 [1st Dept 2019]). Here, the court declines to apply the "drastic sanction" of dismissing the complaint, as the record indicates that pl......
-
Soriano v. Osorio, 10510
...... demand on the board of defendant Sushi Vida, Inc. d/b/a Mama Sushi (Mama Sushi) to bring an action ......