Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The record does not indicate that the plaintiff's failure to list the identities of a number of witnesses was willful or contumacious. Thus, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to preclude and/or strike the testimony of these witnesses (see, Guillen v New York City Tr. Auth.,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.