Berman v. Szpilzinger
| Decision Date | 27 February 1992 |
| Citation | 180 A.D.2d 612,580 N.Y.S.2d 324 |
| Parties | Michael BERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nathan SZPILZINGER, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before MILONAS, J.P., and KUPFERMAN, ROSS and SMITH, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam J. Altman, J.), entered July 23, 1991, which, inter alia, granted defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3126 to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion pursuant to CPLR 3103 for a protective order, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the order of the same court, entered July 30, 1991, which denied plaintiff's motion to reargue and renew the prior motion and cross motion, is deemed an appeal from an order denying a motion only to reargue, and, so considered, dismissed as nonappealable, without costs.
Although the striking of a pleading pursuant to CPLR 3126 is an extreme and drastic penalty to be invoked only where the refusal to obey an order for disclosure or failure to disclose pursuant to notice was clearly contumacious or deliberate (Henry Rosenfeld, Inc. v. Bower & Gardner, 161 A.D.2d 374, 555 N.Y.S.2d 320), it is equally well settled that the nature and degree of the penalty to be imposed for such a refusal or failure is a matter lying within the sound discretion of the court (Brandi v. Chan, 151 A.D.2d 853, 854, 542 N.Y.S.2d 827, app. dismissed, 75 N.Y.2d 789, 552 N.Y.S.2d 98, 551 N.E.2d 591).
Here, we perceive no abuse of discretion. The record shows that plaintiff repeatedly refused to comply with prior court orders, two stipulations and a multitude of letters from defendant's counsel requesting responses to defendant's interrogatories. As a result, defendant was compelled to make numerous motions over a period of some two years in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain complete disclosure. It is not true, as plaintiff argues, that the relevancy and appropriateness of his responses are in issue on the present appeal, the IAS court, in a prior order from which defendant did not appeal, having specifically found, after striking 56 of defendant's interrogatories, that all of the remaining document demands were proper (Fellner v. Texas Mexican Railway Company, 76 A.D.2d 820, 821, 429 N.Y.S.2d 27 [Silverman, J., dissenting]. These facts support the IAS court's determination that plaintiff's conduct was willful and contumacious, and justify the sanction of dismissal (Zletz v. Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 713, 499...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lawrence H. Morse Inc. v. Anson
...N.Y.2d 711, 499 N.Y.S.2d 933, 490 N.E.2d 852; Zirin v. Brookdale Hosp. Med. Ctr., 216 A.D.2d 461, 628 N.Y.S.2d 394; Berman v. Szpilzinger, 180 A.D.2d 612, 580 N.Y.S.2d 324; cf., Kubacka v. Town of N. Hempstead, 240 A.D.2d 374, 657 N.Y.S.2d 770; Ashline v. Kestner Engrs., 219 A.D.2d 788, 790......
-
Dunne v. Amchem Prods.
...122 [1999]; Zletz v Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 713 [1986]; see Ortega v City of New York, 9 NY3d at 69, 76, 79 [2007]; Berman v Szoihinger, 180 A.D.2d 612 [1st Dept 199]); Brandi v Chan, 151 A.D.2d 853, 854 [3d Dept 1989]. The Court of Appeals and the Appellate Divisions have repeatedly admon......
-
Dunne v. Amchem Prods.
...122 [1999]; Zletz v Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 713 [1986]; see Ortega v City of New York, 9 NY3d at 69, 76, 79 [2007]; Berman v Szoihinger, 180 A.D.2d 612 [1st Dept 199]); Brandi v Chan, 151 A.D.2d 853, 854 [3d Dept 1989]. The Court of Appeals and the Appellate Divisions have repeatedly admon......
-
El Barrio Holdings, LLC v. 333-339 East 109 LLC, 2008 NY Slip Op 32297(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 8/13/2008)
...within the broad discretion of the trial court. Zletz v. Wetanson, 67 N.Y.2d 711, 499 N.Y.S.2d 933 (1986); Berman v. Szpilzinger, 180 A.D.2d 612, 580 N.Y.S.2d 324 (1st Dept., 1992). In Stanfill Plumbing & Heating Corp. v. Drava Constructors, Inc., 216 A.D.2d 101, N.Y.S.2d 689 (1st Dept., 19......