As the motion court held, plaintiff's claim in opposition to the motion that the documents sought by defendant either no longer exist or were never kept in the first place is thoroughly undermined by plaintiff's principals' earlier deposition testimony that such documents do exist and indeed some were even examined subsequent to the commencement of the action. The inference is inescapable that at some point after the first of those depositions the documents in question were willfully destroyed in contumacious disobedience of the two court orders that directed their production (see, Siegman v. Rosen, 270 A.D.2d 14).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.