Pierre v. 100 Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*805The Supreme Court should not have granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the answer of the defendants 100 Corp., 201 Builders Corp., and Menashe Shlomo (hereinafter collectively the appellants). Contrary to the Supreme Court’s determination, the record demonstrates that the appellants complied with a conditional order of preclusion dated July 15, 2009, by serving a bill of particulars and responsive documents, and by producing the appellant Menashe Shlomo, who is an officer of both corporate appellants, for a deposition. Although the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bivona v. Trump Marina Casino Hotel ResortAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Morano v. Westchester Paving & Sealing Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- LOP Development, LLC v. ZHL Group, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- McGroarty v. Long Island College HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Sullivan v. NigroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Robert v. Azoulay Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Siradze v. AVB 1865 Broadway, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- John Hancock Life Insurance v. Triangulo Real Estate Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- John Hancock Life Insurance v. Triangulo Real Estate Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Then v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.