Summary
The Appellate Division, First Department reversed an order denying the plaintiff's motion for discovery sanctions under CPLR 3126(c). The court held that defendants willfully and contumaciously failed to disclose surveillance video of the plaintiff's accident and directed that defendants be precluded from introducing the video.
Holdings
- Defendants acted willfully and contumaciously by failing to produce the surveillance video in response to repeated demands and by repeatedly denying its existence.
- Plaintiff was prejudiced by defendants' late production of the surveillance video because the video was disclosed only after plaintiff's deposition had taken place.
- The appropriate sanction was preclusion of defendants' introduction of the surveillance video, rather than the more severe sanction of striking defendants' answer.
Questions Presented
- Whether defendants' failure to disclose surveillance video despite repeated demands and denials was willful and contumacious conduct warranting discovery sanctions.
- Whether plaintiff was prejudiced by the late production of the surveillance video.
- Whether preclusion of the surveillance video was an appropriate sanction under CPLR 3126(c).
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (3)
- Jones v. Green, 34 A.D.3d 260, 261 (1st Dep't 2006)(followed)
- Polakoff v. NYU Hosps. Ctr., 176 A.D.3d 613, 614 (1st Dep't 2019)(analogized)
- Tai Tran v. New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 99 N.Y.2d 383, 389-390 (2003)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…