Hall v. Penas

• Decision Date: 15 March 2004
• Docket Number: 2003-06530.
• Citation: Hall v. Penas, 5 AD3d 549, 772 N.Y.S.2d 835, 2004 NY Slip Op 1737 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
• Parties: LAUREN HALL, Appellant, v. JOSEFA PENAS, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

5 A.D.3d 549

772 N.Y.S.2d 835

2004 NY Slip Op 01737

LAUREN HALL, Appellant, v. JOSEFA PENAS, Respondent.

2003-06530.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.

March 15, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated July 9, 2003, as denied that branch of her motion which was to strike the defendant's answer for failure to comply with a conditional order dated March 28, 2002, and granted that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was to compel her to provide certain medical authorizations.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to strike the answer is granted, and that branch of the defendant's cross motion which was to compel her to provide certain medical authorizations is denied.

As a result of the defendant's failure to appear for her deposition on or before May 2, 2003, the conditional order dated March 28, 2002, became absolute (see Marrone v Orson Holding Corp., 302 AD2d 371 [2003]; Stewart v City of New York, 266 AD2d 452 [1999]). To be relieved of the adverse impact of the conditional order, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear at the deposition and the existence of a meritorious defense (see ...