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.
Barriga v. Sapo
Citations: 250 A.D.2d 795; 673 N.Y.S.2d 211; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6040
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; May 26, 1998; New York; State Appellate Court
Freddy Barriga and Maria Flores, defendants in a personal injury case, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which denied their motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint against them. The appellate court reversed this order, granting the defendants' motion and dismissing the complaint. The court noted that the Supreme Court had previously issued a conditional order requiring plaintiffs to respond to discovery demands within 60 days, failing which they would be precluded from presenting evidence on damages at trial. The plaintiffs did not respond in time, making the preclusion absolute. To be excused from this default, plaintiffs needed to show a reasonable excuse for their failure and a valid cause of action, which they failed to do. Consequently, the Supreme Court should have granted the summary judgment motions of both sets of defendants, Barriga and Flores, as well as Anna Sapo and German Shapiro. All judges concurred in the decision.