Gloveman Realty Corp. v. JefferysGloveman Realty Corp. v. Jefferys
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Where a party destroys essential physical evidence “such that its opponents are ‘prejudicially bereft of appropriate means to confront a claim with incisive evidence,’ the spoliator may be sanctioned by the striking of its pleading” (New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v Turnerson‘s Elec., 280 AD2d 652, 653 [2001], quoting DiDomenico v C & S Aeromatik Supplies, 252 AD2d 41, 53 [1998]). However, “[w]here the evidence lost is not central to the case or its destruction is not prejudicial, a lesser sanction, or no sanction, may be appropriate” (Klein v Ford Motor Co., 303 AD2d 376 [2003]).
Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the defendant‘s motion which was to dismiss the complaint pursuant to