Legal Opinion

Robustelli v. Robustelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 7, 1999PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated July 2, 1998, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was to preclude him from introducing evidence as to his finances at trial based upon his failure to comply with court-ordered discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

“In order to invoke the drastic remedy of preclusion, the court must determine that the offending party’s lack of cooperation with disclosure was willful, deliberate, and contumacious”…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Vatel v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  2. Maillard v. MaillardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. Brady v. County of NassauAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  4. Kivo v. KivoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cornish v. Eraca-CornishAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  2. Pearl v. PearlAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  3. Cornish v. Eraca-CornishAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API