Doino v. RPS Corp. — 145 A.D.3d 576

Majority

p. 576

Michael Doino, Appellant, v RPS Corp., Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[41 NYS3d 892]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Kalish, J.), entered on or about March 24, 2016, which denied plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant RPS Corp.’s answer pursuant to CPLR 3126 (3) or, in the alternative, to resolve all issues of liability in his favor pursuant to CPLR 3126 (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

p. 577

We agree with the motion court that the drastic remedy of striking defendant’s answer, pursuant to CPLR 3126, was not warranted.

Plaintiff failed to show that he has been unduly prejudiced by the delay, and concedes that defendant was in compliance with the prior court orders as of January 2016. Moreover, defendant has been penalized for its belated responses and disclosure; pursuant to a conditional self-executing order issued by the motion court in May 2015, defendant RPS Corp. is “precluded from offering evidence at trial on the issue of liability.” We see no basis for imposing any additional penalty.

Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Kapnick, JJ.