Opinion
10199N Index 161539/15
10-24-2019
1591 SECOND AVENUE LLC, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Greenberg, Trager & Herbst, LLP, New York (Richard J. Lambert of counsel), for appellants. Young & Yagerman, P.C., New York (Louise M. Cherkis of counsel), for respondents.
Greenberg, Trager & Herbst, LLP, New York (Richard J. Lambert of counsel), for appellants.
Young & Yagerman, P.C., New York (Louise M. Cherkis of counsel), for respondents.
Friedman, J.P., Kapnick, Oing, Singh, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about April 18, 2019, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs' motion to strike defendants' answer due to discovery abuses, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiffs failed to conclusively demonstrate that defendants' actions relating to discovery warranted the drastic remedy of striking defendants' answer (see Henderson–Jones v. City of New York , 87 A.D.3d 498, 504, 928 N.Y.S.2d 536 [1st Dept. 2011] ). Defendants largely provided timely responses to the court's orders directing disclosure, and those responses generally evidenced a good-faith effort to meaningfully address plaintiffs' requests (cf. Kihl v. Pfeffer , 94 N.Y.2d 118, 123, 700 N.Y.S.2d 87, 722 N.E.2d 55 [1999] ).
We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.