LIPPMAN v. GOODMAN (2018)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York.

Roy LIPPMAN, Appellant, v. Ezra N. GOODMAN and Dean M. Roberts, Respondents.

2016-1737 Q C

Decided: July 06, 2018

PRESENT: MICHELLE WESTON, J.P., DAVID ELLIOT, BERNICE D. SIEGAL, JJ

Roy Lippman, appellant pro se. Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, P.A., for respondents (no brief filed).

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff appeals from an order which denied his motion to compel discovery. CPLR 3124 states that, “[i]f a person fails to respond to or comply with any request, notice, interrogatory, demand, question or order under” article 31, “the party seeking disclosure may move to compel compliance or a response.” Here, plaintiff has not alleged, let alone demonstrated, that he served any such demand or request, and therefore the relief sought by plaintiff is not available to him.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

WESTON, J.P., ELLIOT and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.

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Out of date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