Lentz v. Nic's Gym, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court has broad discretion in determining what, if any, sanction should be imposed for spoliation of evidence (see Iannucci v Rose, 8 AD3d 437, 438 [2004]). “It may, under appropriate circumstances, impose a sanction ‘even if the destruction occurred through negligence rather than wilfulness, and even if the evidence was destroyed before the spoliator became a party, provided [the spoliator] was on notice that the evidence might be needed for future litigation’ ” (id. at 438, quoting *619DiDomenico v C & S Aeromatik Supplies, 252 AD2d 41, 53 [1998]; see Favish v Tepler, 294 AD2d 396…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- DiDomenico v. C & S Aeromatik Supplies, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Iannucci v. RoseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- De Los Santos v. PolancoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Ifraimov v. Phoenix Industrial GasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Favish v. TeplerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Samaroo v. Bogopa Service Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Biniachvili v. Yeshivat Shaare Torah, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Pennachio v. Costco Wholesale Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Mangione v. JacobsNew York Supreme Court · 2012
- Mangilit-Pradlik v. Valvoline Instant Oil Change GE 6604-White PlainsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.