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.
BANK OF SMITHTOWN, respondent, v. Thomas BOGLINO, et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
In appeals by the defendants Thomas Boglino and Lisa Boglino from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated July 30, 1996, (2) a judgment of foreclosure of the same court, dated November 18, 1996, (3) an order and resettled and amended judgment of foreclosure (one paper) of the same court, dated September 9, 1997, and (4) an order of the same court, also dated September 9, 1997, which were determined by decision and order of this court dated October 13, 1998, counsel for the appellants and the respondent were directed to show cause why an order should not be made and entered imposing such sanctions costs, if any, on the appellants and their counsel pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1(c) as this court may deem appropriate (Bank of Smithtown v. Boglino, 254 A.D.2d 319, 678 N.Y.S.2d 640).
On the court's own motion and on the papers submitted in opposition or relation thereto, it is,
ORDERED that within 30 days after the service upon the appellant Thomas Boglino of a copy of this decision and order on motion with notice of entry, the appellant Thomas Boglino is directed to pay (1) sanctions in the sum of $5,000 to the Commissioner of Taxation and Finance (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.3); and (2) attorneys' fees in the sum of $11,631.25 to the respondent (see, 22 NYCRR 130.1.1[a] ); and it is further,
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, shall enter judgment accordingly (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.2).
We find that the conduct of the appellant Thomas Boglino throughout this proceeding has been patently frivolous and undertaken primarily to delay or prolong the resolution of the litigation. Accordingly, the payment by Mr. Boglino of sanctions in the sum of $5,000, and attorneys' fees in the sum of $11,631.25, the sum which the respondent spent in defending against the appeals and opposing motions brought in connection with the appeals, is appropriate.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: March 15, 1999
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)