1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 102 A.D.3d
  5. 102 A.D.3d 201 (2012)
 

ARPINO v. F.J.F. & SONS ELEC.

2011-02636.

102 A.D.3d 201 (2012)

959 N.Y.S.2d 74

2012 NY Slip Op 8271

DOMINIC ARPINO, Appellant, v. F.J.F. & SONS ELECTRIC CO., INC., et al., Respondents.

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

Decided December 5, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Pugatch & Nikolis, Garden City ( Phillip P. Nikolis and Gary E. Rosenberg of counsel), for appellant.

Bello & Larkin and Mauro Lilling Naparty, LLP, Great Neck ( Matthew W. Naparty and Timothy O'Shaughnessy of counsel), for respondents.

DILLON, J.P., DICKERSON, LEVENTHAL and MILLER, JJ., concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT

AUSTIN, J.

The question presented on this appeal is what sanction, if any, is appropriate under CPLR 3126 when a party, in response to a court's discovery order, provides belated, false, incomplete, or misleading information as to material issues before attempting to supplement its discovery responses after the filing of the note of issue.

On the afternoon of June 25, 2008, the plaintiff...

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