The motion court properly exercised its discretion in denying appellants' motion, however termed, since their failure to comply with three orders of discovery, which expressly warned of the consequences of non-compliance, or to respond to plaintiff's motion for a default judgment, evinced a willful neglect of, or, at best, a lack of concerned attention to the proceedings (see, Martinez v Belanger,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
SMITH v. CITY OF NEW YORK
250 A.D.2d 393 (1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 694
Maureen D. Smith, Respondent, v. City of New York et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
May 7, 1998
May 7, 1998
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.