Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Manuel CEDENO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. 155 WEST 162, LLC, Defendant-Appellant, 155 W 162 St Owner, LLC, et al., Defendants.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Adrian N. Armstrong. J.), entered November 24, 2021, which denied defendant 155 West 162, LLC's motion for a stay of entry of a proposed judgment, filed on September 13, 2021, in favor of plaintiff, and directed that defendant's answer be stricken and the matter proceed to trial on damages against defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered August 9, 2022, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant's motion to vacate the November 24, 2021 order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly denied defendant's motion for a stay of entry of the proposed judgment because the underlying conditional order dated June 16, 2020 directing the striking of the answer upon defendant's failure to comply with discovery directives within 30 days was self-executing and absolute. Defendant failed to comply with numerous court orders and so–ordered stipulations agreeing to provide the requested discovery. Defendant also failed to submit an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge of the efforts it made to locate the requested materials (Henderson v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 16 NY3d 886, 887–888 [2011]). Furthermore, defendant's proper recourse was to appeal from the order dated June 16, 2020 (Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. NHT Owners LLC, 115 AD3d 551 [1st Dept 2014]) or to move to vacate the default in providing the discovery (Mehler v. Jones, 181 AD3d 535, 535–536 [1st Dept 2020]).
We reject defendant's contention that the court improperly sanctioned it for the noncompliance of other entities that were no longer parties in the action.
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 125-, 126
Decided: April 27, 2023
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)