The plaintiff contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying his motion to strike the answer of the defendant New York City Transit Authority or impose sanctions based on spoliation of evidence. However, the appeal has been rendered academic in light of our determination of the appeal from an amended order of the same court dated January 19, 2005 (
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.
SACCOMAGNO v. CITY OF NEW YORK
29 A.D.3d 980 (2006)
814 N.Y.S.2d 879
CHAD SACCOMAGNO, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
May 30, 2006.
May 30, 2006.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second 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.
