Siradze v. AVB 1865 Broadway, LLC

• Decision Date: 10 August 2022
• Docket Number: 2021–00175,Index No. 515262/19
• Citation: 208 A.D.3d 607,173 N.Y.S.3d 582
• Parties: Tariel SIRADZE, respondent, v. AVB 1865 BROADWAY, LLC, et al., appellants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

208 A.D.3d 607
173 N.Y.S.3d 582

Tariel SIRADZE, respondent,
v.
AVB 1865 BROADWAY, LLC, et al., appellants.

2021–00175
Index No. 515262/19

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—June 2, 2022
August 10, 2022

173 N.Y.S.3d 583

Ropers Majeski, P.C., New York, NY (Kirsten L. Molloy of counsel), for appellants.

Elefterakis, Elefterakis & Panek, New York, NY (Gennaro Savastano of counsel), for respondent.

COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., BETSY BARROS, ROBERT J. MILLER, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

208 A.D.3d 607

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lawrence Knipel, J.), dated December 15, 2020. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to preclude the defendants from testifying or offering any evidence at trial.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to preclude the defendants from testifying or offering any evidence at trial is denied.

The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries. In an order dated October 22, 2020, the Supreme Court, inter alia, directed the defendants to respond to outstanding discovery demands and provide court-ordered

208 A.D.3d 608

discovery no later than November 23, 2020, or be precluded from testifying or offering any evidence at trial (hereinafter the conditional order). Thereafter, the defendants moved by order to show cause dated November 19, 2020, to extend their time to provide documents in response to the plaintiff's notice for discovery and inspection pursuant to the conditional order. On November 23, 2020, the defendants served a response to the plaintiff's notice for discovery and inspection. By notice of motion dated November 25, 2020, the plaintiff moved pursuant to CPLR 3126, inter alia, to preclude the defendants from testifying or offering any evidence at trial for failing to comply with, among other things, the conditional order. In an order dated December 15, 2020, the court denied the defendants' motion and granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion. The defendants appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion.

A conditional order of preclusion requires a party to provide specified discovery by a date certain or face the sanctions specified in the order...