Case Name: Enrique Torres et al., Respondents, v. Herbert P. DeCordova et al., Defendants, and Sgardo E. Saavedra et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1999-06-07
Citations: 262 A.D.2d 399
Docket Number: 
Parties: Enrique Torres et al., Respondents, v Herbert P. DeCordova et al., Defendants, and Sgardo E. Saavedra et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 262
Pages: 399–399

Head Matter:
Enrique Torres et al., Respondents, v Herbert P. DeCordova et al., Defendants, and Sgardo E. Saavedra et al., Appellants.
[691 NYS2d 312]

Opinion:
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants Sgardo E. Saavedra and Luz Quintero appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), dated May 27, 1998, which granted that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was to strike their answer unless they provided outstanding discovery and submitted to depositions within 90 days from the date of service of a copy of the order with notice of entry.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The fact that the appellants have disappeared or made themselves unavailable to appear at the depositions provides no basis for denying a motion to strike their answer (see, Torres v Martinez, 250 AD2d 759; Dash v DK Tr., 239 AD2d 313). Santucci, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.