Hyperlawhypertext legal database Lubell v. Work Wear Corp. 86 Misc. 1001

← Cases

Lubell v. Work Wear Corp.

86 Misc. 1001 Court Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department, Decision date 1976-01-16 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1001
Michael Lubell, Respondent, v Work Wear Corporation, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
January 16, 1976
Monasch Chazen & Stream (Arnold C Stream and Robert G. Smith of counsel), for appellant. Ronald Forster and Martin R. Nat for respondent.

Memorandum. Order affirmed, with $10 costs.

Defendant’s attorney did not demonstrate that he was a person with sufficient knowledge of the facts to respond to the interrogatories (CPLR 3134, subd [a]).

Furthermore, the court’s imposition of costs did not constitute an abuse of discretion (CPLR 8106).

Concur: Groat, P. J., Schwartzwald and O’Connor, JJ.