AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CHRISTIAN BARTH, ETC., appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, defendant, NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., respondents (AND A THIRD-PARTY ACTION).

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that "the determination whether or not to strike a pleading lies within the sound discretion of the court" (Ploski v. Riverwood Owners Corp., 284 A.D.2d 316, 317). However, "[w]henever possible, actions should be resolved on the merits" (Mohammed v. 919 Park Place Owners Corp., 245 A.D.2d 351, 352). Accordingly, "[t]he drastic remedy of striking an answer is inappropriate absent a clear showing that the failure to comply with discovery demands is willful, contumacious, or in bad faith" (Garcia v. First Spanish Baptist Church of Islip, 259 A.D.2d 465). Contrary to the plaintiff's contentions, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion. The defendants New York City Board of Education and Abiela Contracting, Inc., generally provided the requested discovery and the record does not clearly demonstrate that their failure to fully comply with discovery was willful, contumacious, or in bad faith (see Payne v. Rouse Corp., 269 A.D.2d 510).

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, GOLDSTEIN and FRIEDMANN, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BARTH v. CITY OF NEW YORK
(May 13, 2002)