1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 255 A.D.2d
  5. 255 A.D.2d 505 (1998)
 

VALENTINO v. ROMERO

255 A.D.2d 505 (1998)

680 N.Y.S.2d 176

Marie Valentino, Respondent, v. Cesar Romero, Appellant, and Jeffrey Santangelo et al., Respondents. (And a Third-Party Action.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.

November 23, 1998

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in conditionally granting the motion and cross motion to strike the appellant's answer since the appellant has disappeared or made himself unavailable for scheduled examinations before trial (see, Cavallino v Sonsky, 251 A.D.2d 361

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

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.

Citing Cases