Hernandez v. Pace Elevator Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*494The IAS court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiffs request for spoliation sanctions. There is no evidence that Pace refused to obey an order for disclosure or that it wilfully failed to disclose the contract at issue and any records of five-year tests. There is also no evidence that Pace destroyed the missing documents. Indeed, Pace’s president testified that it searched for the missing documents, but could not find them. Under such circumstances, spoliation sanctions are not warranted (see Voultepsis v Gumley-Haft-Klierer, Inc., 60 AD3d 524, 526 [2009]).
Because Pace’s…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Espinal v. Melville Snow Contractors, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Amatulli v. Delhi Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Schozer v. William Penn Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Chateau D' If Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Kleinberg v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jaikran v. Shoppers Jamaica, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Burch v. New York City Housing AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Amezquita v. RCPI Landmark Props., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Richardson v. GarelyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024
- Richardson v. GarelyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.