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.
MYUNG SUM SUH, et al., appellants, v. JUNG JA KIM, et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dollard, J.), entered July 11, 2007, as granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the complaint and dismiss the action.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the complaint and dismiss the action is denied.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in striking the complaint, as there was no clear showing that the plaintiffs' failure to comply with certain discovery demands and court-ordered discovery was willful or contumacious (see CPLR 3126; Manko v. Lenox Hill Hosp., 44 A.D.3d 1014, 844 N.Y.S.2d 414; Mawson v. Historic Props., LLC, 30 A.D.3d 480, 481, 817 N.Y.S.2d 364; Lombardo v. St. Francis Hosp. Rehabilitation Servs., 16 A.D.3d 385, 386, 790 N.Y.S.2d 405). The record supports a finding that the plaintiffs substantially, albeit tardily, complied with the requested disclosure, and that their conduct was not willful or contumacious (see Manko v. Lenox Hill Hosp., 44 A.D.3d 1014, 844 N.Y.S.2d 414; Mawson v. Historic Props., LLC, 30 A.D.3d at 481, 817 N.Y.S.2d 364; Lombardo v. St. Francis Hosp. Rehabilitation Servs., 16 A.D.3d at 386, 790 N.Y.S.2d 405).
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: May 20, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)