Plaintiffs spoliated evidence central to their claim that renovations on their apartment, designed by Mojo-Stumer and to be performed by defendant Viscuso's general contracting firm (Vista), were not complete when they invited a new contractor to perform substantial additional work without first permitting defendants to verify the need for such additions, warranting a sanction (see 430 Park Ave. Co. v Bank of Montreal,
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.
OPPENHEIM v. MOJO-STUMER ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C.
1924, 602408/06
69 A.D.3d 407 (2010)
892 N.Y.S.2d 91
2010 NY Slip Op 7
AVIVITH OPPENHEIM et al., Appellants-Respondents, v. MOJO-STUMER ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C., Doing Business as MOJO-STUMER ASSOCIATES, P.C., et al., Respondents-Appellants, et al., Defendant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided January 5, 2010.
Decided January 5, 2010.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court 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.
