Opinion
14509 Index No. 655955/18 Case No. 2021-02226
10-28-2021
122-24 LEXINGTON AVENUE CORP., etc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY, etc., Defendant–Respondent.
Denenberg Law Firm, New York (Deborah J. Denenberg of counsel), for appellant. Mound Cotton Wollan & Greengrass LLP, New York (Kevin F. Buckley of counsel), for respondent.
Denenberg Law Firm, New York (Deborah J. Denenberg of counsel), for appellant.
Mound Cotton Wollan & Greengrass LLP, New York (Kevin F. Buckley of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Gonza´lez, Kennedy, Scarpulla, Rodriguez, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about May 21, 2021, which denied plaintiff's motion to vacate an order that dismissed the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 and 22 NYCRR 202.27, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for its continuing and repeated failure to comply with discovery orders (see Biton v. Turco, 88 A.D.3d 519, 930 N.Y.S.2d 876 [1st Dept. 2011], lv dismissed 30 N.Y.3d 1081, 69 N.Y.S.3d 847, 92 N.E.3d 1237 [2018] ), despite multiple court orders and requests from defendant's counsel to provide discovery (see Goldstein v. CIBC World Mkts. Corp., 30 A.D.3d 217, 817 N.Y.S.2d 19 [1st Dept. 2006] ). Contrary to its contention, plaintiff did not substantially comply with outstanding discovery, since it did not complete depositions or file a note of issue by the deadlines in the last compliance order.
Absent a reasonable excuse, we need not evaluate the merits of plaintiff's claim (see Biton, 88 A.D.3d 519, 930 N.Y.S.2d 876 ).