LAWRENCE G. BIGGIO, Appellant, v JACQUELINE BIGGIO, Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department
801 N.Y.S.2d 339
H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted leave to reargue that branch of the plaintiff‘s prior motion which was for preclusion, and upon reargument, properly vacated its earlier determination granting that branch of the motion. The preclusion order overlooked the plaintiff‘s failure to make full disclosure, including disclosure of financial information regarding assets and expenses clearly within his sole control. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff was in no position to argue that the court should sanction the defendant with the penalty of preclusion (see Richter v Richter, 131 AD2d 453, 454-455 [1987]).
The plaintiff‘s remaining contentions are either without merit or need not be reached in light of the foregoing determination.
H. MILLER, J.P., RITTER, GOLDSTEIN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.
