Legal Opinion
Rosen v. Corvalon
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 30, 2003PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered April 14, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied plaintiffs motion to strike the answer of defendant Jose Corvalon, M.D., unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The refusal to strike defendant’s answer for failure to appear at scheduled depositions was within the court’s broad discretion in the supervision of disclosure (see Nitz v Prudential-Bache Sec., 102 AD2d 914, 915 [1984]). As we have noted, “a court should not resort to striking an answer for failure to comply with discovery directives…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Nitz v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Catarine v. Beth Israel Medical CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Palmenta v. Columbia UniversityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Iskowitz v. Forkosh Construction Co., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- United States Fire Insurance v. J.R. Greene, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
3Cited by3 opinions
- Banner v. New York City Housing AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Aquino v. TaylorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Gonzalez v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007