Case Name: B.E.N. Trading Corp., Plaintiff, v. Shirley Import, Inc., et al., Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants. Binyamin Abadi et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2009-12-22
Citations: 68 A.D.3d 629
Docket Number: 
Parties: B.E.N. Trading Corp., Plaintiff, v Shirley Import, Inc., et al., Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants. Binyamin Abadi et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 68
Pages: 629–630

Head Matter:
B.E.N. Trading Corp., Plaintiff, v Shirley Import, Inc., et al., Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants. Binyamin Abadi et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.
[890 NYS2d 323]

Opinion:
Defendants' failure to offer a reasonable excuse for their noncompliance with discovery demands, court orders and the court's rules gives rise to an inference of willful and contumacious conduct (Siegman v Rosen, 270 AD2d 14, 15 [2000]). The striking of their answer and third-party complaint was a proper exercise of judicial discretion in light of such conduct (CPLR 3126; see Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118, 123 [1999]). Concur— Sweeny, J.P., Catterson, Renwick, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.