Cdr Creances S.A.S. v. Cohen

Decision Date21 May 2009
Docket Number629NB.,628.,627.,629NA.,629N.,626.
Citation880 N.Y.S.2d 251,62 A.D.3d 576,2009 NY Slip Op 04013
PartiesCDR CRÉANCES S.A.S., as Successor to SOCIETE DE BANQUE OCCIDENTALE, Respondent, v. MAURICE COHEN et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. CDR CRÉANCES S.A.S., as Successor to SOCIETE DE BANQUE OCCIDENTALE, Respondent-Appellant, v. LEON COHEN et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered August 29, 2008, directing defendants Maraboeuf, Aich and Petetin to pay plaintiff $265,865,120.81, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and vacated. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered August 13, 2008, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in appeals from ensuing order and judgment. Order, same court and Justice, entered December 1, 2008, to the extent it denied the cross motions of defendants Cohen and Habib, and the subsequent motion of Maraboeuf, Aich and Petetin, to renew the August 13 order and vacate the default judgments entered against those defendants by that order, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, renewal granted, the answers of those parties reinstated, and the restraining orders, entered December 24, 2008, vacated. Judgments, same court and Justice, entered September 25, 2008, awarding plaintiff $268,067,132.33 and $268,067,157.33 against defendant World Business Center, inter alia, unanimously reversed, on the law

and the facts, without costs, and vacated. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered January 30, 2009, which denied World Business Center's motions to renew or vacate default judgments against it by order entered August 13, 2008, unanimously dismissed, without costs. [See 2008 NY Slip Op 32352(U).]

While a court is vested with broad discretion to control its calendar and supervise disclosure in order to facilitate the resolution of cases, and the imposition of sanctions for discovery misfeasance is generally a matter best left to the trial court's discretion, the IAS court nonetheless improvidently exercised its discretion in granting default judgments against defendants-appellants. In view of the brief period between the first discovery order and the granting of the defaults (see Castillo v Garzon-Ruiz, 290 AD2d 288 [2002]), the magnitude of the judgments (New York Annual Conference of United Methodist Church v Preusch, 51 AD2d 711, 712 [1976]), and the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • CDR Créances S.A. v. Cohen
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 27 Diciembre 2012
    ...of judgment by default, “reasonable latitude should have been afforded before imposing the ultimate sanction” (62 A.D.3d 576, 577, 880 N.Y.S.2d 251 [1st Dept. 2009] ). Thereafter, defendants continued to resist discovery orders that this Court found to be generally within the exercise of Su......
  • CDR CRéances S.A.S. v. Cohen
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 8 Mayo 2014
    ...and the defaults, the magnitude of the judgments and the lack of specific prejudice to the plaintiff (CDR Créances S.A.S. v. Cohen, 62 A.D.3d 576, 880 N.Y.S.2d 251 [1st Dept.2009] ). Upon remand, discovery resumed in the 2003 and 2006 actions. Defendants Maraboeuf, Aich and Patricia Habib P......
  • CDR Créances S.A.S. v. Cohen
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 8 Mayo 2014
    ...and the defaults, the magnitude of the judgments and the lack of specific prejudice to the plaintiff (CDR Créances S.A.S. v. Cohen, 62 A.D.3d 576, 880 N.Y.S.2d 251 [1st Dept.2009] ). Upon remand, discovery resumed in the 2003 and 2006 actions. Defendants Maraboeuf, Aich and Patricia Habib P......
  • One William St. Capital Mgmt., LP. v. Educ. Loan Trust IV
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 14 Agosto 2013
    ...as might sustain a claim for punitive damages. See New York Univ. v. Continental Ins. Co., 87 N.Y.2d at 315-316; CDR Creances S.A.S. v. Cohen, 62 A.D.3d 576 (1st Dep't 2009). In fact, the proposed amended petition does not set forth any specific facts in support of the claim for punitive da......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT