Refusal to Comply with Discovery Demand Supported Sanction of Dismissal of the Complaint
The Second Department determined Supreme Court had properly dismissed the complaint in a medical malpractice action because the plaintiffs refused to identify the mohel who had performed the circumcision of infant plaintiff. In finding dismissal of the entire complaint an appropriate sanction, the court wrote:
“The Supreme Court has broad discretion in making determinations concerning matters of disclosure including the nature and degree of the penalty to be imposed under CPLR 3126” … . “The striking of a pleading may be appropriate where there is a clear showing that the failure to comply with discovery demands is willful or contumacious”… . Further, the court can infer that a party is acting willfully and contumaciously through his or her repeated failure to respond to demands or to comply with discovery orders … . Silberstein v Maimonides Med Ctr, 2013 NY Slip Op 05813, 2nd Dept 9-11-13