Posts Categorized: Sanctions

Posted: August 31, 2020

Bringing an Action Maliciously An Insufficient Basis for an Abuse of Process Claim

On August 26, 2020, the Second Department issued a decision in Seidler v. Knopf, 2020 NY Slip Op. 04800, holding that an abuse of process claim could not be premised on allegedly suing someone maliciously, explaining: We disagree, however, with the Supreme Court’s determination to deny that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was for... Read more »

Posted: May 30, 2020

Spoliation Sanctions Not Justified When Party Preserved Documents When it Became Aware That Litigation Was Probable

On May 21, 2020, the First Department issued a decision in China Dev. Indus. Bank v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op. 02987, holding that spoliation sanctions were not appropriate when a party preserved evidence as soon as it became aware that litigation was probable, explaining: Spoliation sanctions are available regardless of... Read more »

Posted: January 24, 2020

Discovery Sanction Reversed as Excessive

On January 14, 2020, the First Department issued a decision in Beach v. Touradji Capital Mgt., LP, 2020 NY Slip Op. 00230, reversing a discovery sanction as excessive, explaining: [A]ppellants contend that they committed no discovery violations, but even if they did, the court’s preclusion orders constituted an excessive sanction that deprived them of a... Read more »

Posted: November 24, 2019

Counsel Sanctioned for Bringing Frivolous Action

On November 13, 2019, Justice Garguillo of the Suffolk County Commercial Division issued a decision in Doscher v. Meyer, 2019 NY Slip Op. 08171, sanctioning a litigant for bringing a frivolous action, explaining: We agree with the Supreme Court’s determination granting those branches of the respective motions of the Emerson defendants and the Greenberg Traurig... Read more »

Posted: August 10, 2019

Discovery Sanctions Denied for Failure to Explain in Detail Movant’s Efforts to Resolve the Dispute

On August 7, 2019, the Second Department issued a decision in Bronstein v. Charm City Hous., LLC, 2019 NY Slip Op. 06058, denying discovery sanctions because of the movant’s failure to explain in detail its efforts to resolve the dispute, explaining: Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.7(a) and (c), a motion relating to disclosure must be... Read more »

Posted: February 28, 2019

First Department Affirms Discovery Sanction

On February 26, 2019, the First Department issued a decision in Transasia Commodities Inv. Ltd. v. NewLead JMEG, LLC, 2019 NY Slip Op. 01361, affirming a discovery sanction, explaining: Defendants-appellants’ motion to vacate their default was properly denied. Defendants’s failure to timely pay a $15,000 court-ordered sanction may be deemed willful, as such recent conduct... Read more »

Posted: November 4, 2018

Party Sanctioned for Excessive Attorneys’ Eyes Only Designations

On October 18, 2018, Justice Masley of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Callsome Solutions Inc. v. Google, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op. 32716(U), sanctioning a party for making excessive attorneys’ eyes only confidentiality designations, explaining: Our court system is dependent on all parties engaged in litigation abiding by the rules of... Read more »