PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS
After being injured in an automobile accident, X.V., who was a passenger in M.V.’s vehicle, sued the City of Mount Vernon, (owner), R.U. (its driver), and M.V. for his personal injuries.
When the defendants asked that the plaintiff comply with certain discovery demands, he failed or refused to do so, which lead to a motion to strike his pleadings. On June 13, 2018, the Westchester County Supreme Court entered a conditional order which granted the defendants’ request, unless by June 20, 2018, X.V. provided "all proper medical and hospital HIPPA-compliant authorizations, employment authorizations unrestricted to date, original, proper and duly executed powers of attorney and an accurate list of the names and addresses of plaintiff's medical providers.”
When X.V. failed to comply, on July 6, 2018, the pleadings were stricken as against the three defendants. And when he later attempted to reargue and vacate that sanction, that request was denied.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, noted that to be relieved of the consequences of a conditional order, X.V. needed to show a “reasonable excuse” for the noncompliance and “the existence of a potentially meritorious action.” Since he didn’t supply the requisite authorizations by the delineated deadline and provided no “reasonable excuse” for that lapse, the AD2 thought the case’s dismissal was appropriate under the circumstances.
He clearly needed to unconditionally comply with that conditional order ….
# # #
DECISION