CB v. Howard Security, et al., Defendants–Appellants–Respondents. (2018)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

CB by His Mother and Natural Guardian Lateaqua Suarez, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents–Appellants, v. Howard Security, et al., Defendants–Appellants–Respondents.

4859

Decided: January 04, 2018

Acosta, P.J., Manzanet–Daniels, Gische, Kapnick, Kahn, JJ.

Carroll, McNulty & Kull LLC, New York (Frank J. Wenick of counsel), for Howard Security, appellant-respondent. Mauro Lilling Naparty, LLP, Woodbury (Matthew W. Naparty of counsel), for Sammon–Build Center Housing Development Fund Corporation and Tolentine Zeiser Community Life Center, appellants-respondents. Philip Newman, P.C., Bronx (Paul Bibuld of counsel), for respondents-appellants. Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about November 29, 2016, modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to grant plaintiffs' motion for a spoliation charge to the extent of permitting an adverse inference charge at trial for defendants

‘ failure to produce the log book in question, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Opinion by Acosta, P.J. All concur.

Order filed.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network