From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jimenez v. Weiner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 17, 2004
8 A.D.3d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

3674.

Decided June 17, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sallie Manzanet, J.), entered on or about March 11, 2003, which denied plaintiff's motion to strike the answer or preclude defendants from offering evidence at trial, and to permit the filing of a note of issue, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of granting plaintiff's motion only to the extent indicated in the decision herein, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The Pagan Law Firm, P.C., New York (Beth N. Jablon of counsel), for appellant.

Henderson Brennan, White Plains (Brian C. Henderson of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Williams, JJ.


Plaintiff's counsel notified defendants of an intention to inspect a ramp that allegedly caused the accident and advised defendant of its obligation to preserve and not destroy or dispose of the ramp. Since the ramp was preserved for a reasonable period of time (3½ years), in full public view during store hours, during which no inspection was held by plaintiff, and there is no evidence that defendants, who eventually removed and replaced it with a more permanent ramp, did so willfully, contumaciously or in bad faith, the sanctions sought by plaintiff are not warranted. However, defendant's failure to notify plaintiff's counsel of the intended removal is of substantial prejudice to plaintiff, and requires some relief. Since defendant has indicated that plaintiff's expert can formulate an opinion based on the available photographs, the appropriate remedy is to preclude defendant from objecting to the expert's use of such photographs as the basis for the expert's opinion, subject to the proper foundation being laid.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Jimenez v. Weiner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 17, 2004
8 A.D.3d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Jimenez v. Weiner

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL JIMENEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAUL WEINER, ET AL., Defendants…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 17, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
779 N.Y.S.2d 23

Citing Cases

Seda v. Epstein

In view of plaintiff's testimony that he informed defendants a year before the accident that the window frame…

Scordo v. Costco Wholesale Corp.

Here, the defendant failed to establish that the plaintiffs acted willfully or contumaciously in disposing of…