Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Brannigan v. Christie Overhead Door
Citations: 2016 NY Slip Op 7918; 144 A.D.3d 959; 43 N.Y.S.3d 365Docket: 2014-09905
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; November 22, 2016; New York; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
In Brannigan v. Christie Overhead Door, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed a lower court's order that denied Jeld-Wen, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint due to the plaintiff's willful failure to comply with discovery orders. The plaintiff, James A. Brannigan, alleged personal injuries from being struck by a garage door and had been directed multiple times over 1½ years to provide compliant responses to interrogatories served by Jeld-Wen. After failing to comply with the last order dated March 30, 2014, Jeld-Wen sought dismissal under CPLR 3126, but the Supreme Court denied the motion. The Appellate Division found that while the ultimate penalty of dismissal might be excessive, the Supreme Court improperly exercised its discretion by not granting the motion. The court ordered that the complaint against Jeld-Wen be dismissed unless the plaintiff submitted satisfactory responses to the interrogatories within 45 days of receiving the order. The decision emphasizes the court's authority to impose sanctions for non-compliance with discovery and the discretion vested in the Appellate Division to correct trial court decisions.