Bouri v. Jackson
| Decision Date | 27 November 2019 |
| Docket Number | Index No. 507882/13,2017–07680 |
| Citation | 177 A.D.3d 947,113 N.Y.S.3d 232 |
| Parties | Abdelhak BOURI, Respondent, v. Travis JACKSON, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
177 A.D.3d 947
113 N.Y.S.3d 232
Abdelhak BOURI, Respondent,
v.
Travis JACKSON, Appellant.
2017–07680
Index No. 507882/13
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted - June 13, 2019
November 27, 2019
Picciano & Scahill, P.C., Bethpage, N.Y. (Andrea E. Ferrucci of counsel), for appellant.
Jaroslawicz & Jaros, PLLC, New York, N.Y. (David Tolchin of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kathy J. King, J.), dated June 26, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, upon renewal, adhered to a prior determination in an order of the same court dated July 20, 2016, granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the defendant's answer.
ORDERED that the order dated June 26, 2017, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
On July 4, 2013, the plaintiff and the defendant were involved in a motor vehicle collision at the intersection of Emmons and Bedford Avenues in Brooklyn. On December 12, 2013,
the plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for his alleged injuries. This action was joined for trial with another action arising out of the same accident.
The Supreme Court initially directed that depositions be completed by October 8, 2014. The defendant did not appear for a deposition by that date, and he eventually failed to comply with multiple court orders directing him to appear for his deposition. In one of those orders, dated August 21, 2015, the court directed that depositions "will proceed as scheduled regardless of the status or availability of any parties or attorneys from any other action arising out of the subject accident."
On March 22, 2016, the plaintiff moved, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the defendant's answer. In opposition, the defendant submitted his own affidavit, in
which he stated: "I have not appeared for a deposition to date because, as my attorneys have advised me, the plaintiffs in the related action ... have yet to be deposed."
On March 28, 2016, the defendant separately moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident. The plaintiff opposed that motion.
In an order dated June 8, 2016, the Supreme Court, inter alia, conditionally granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to strike the defendant's answer, stating: "Defendant to appear for deposition on July 8, 2016 or answer is stricken. This order is self executing." The defendant did not appear...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Silla v. Silla
...explanations for the failures, or a failure to comply with court-ordered discovery over an extended period of time" (Bouri v Jackson, 177 A.D.3d 947, 949 [2d Dept 2019]; see also Ritornato, 186 A.D.3d at 1424; Maliah-Dupass, 166 A.D.3d at 875; Smookler v Dicerbo, 166 A.D.3d 838, 839-840 [2d......
-
Llanos v. Casale Constr. Servs., Inc.
...excuse for these failures, or a failure to comply with court-ordered discovery over an extended period of time (see Bouri v. Jackson, 177 A.D.3d 947, 949, 113 N.Y.S.3d 232 ; Maliah–Dupass v. Dupass, 166 A.D.3d 873, 875, 88 N.Y.S.3d 436 ; Candela v. Kantor, 154 A.D.3d 733, 734, 64 N.Y.S.3d 3......
-
Marrero v. City of N.Y.
...v. Dupass, 166 A.D.3d 873, 875, 88 N.Y.S.3d 436, Gutman v. Gutman, 121 A.D.3d 1042, 1043, 995 N.Y.S.2d 180)." Bouri v. Jackson, 177 A.D.3d 947, 949, 113 N.Y.S.3d 232, 234-235 [2nd Dept 2019]. The Plaintiff's allegations do not detail conduct that can properly be considered willful and contu......
-
Ghana v. Labkowski
...proffer a reasonable excuse for that failure, supports an inference that such failure is willful and contumacious (see Bouri v Jackson. 177 A.D.3d 947, 949 [2d Dept 2019]; Apladenaki v Greenpoint Mortg. Funding, Inc., 117 A.D.3d 976, 977 [2d Dept 2014]; Caslrignano v Flynn, 255 A.D.2d 352, ......