Yung Chong Ho v. UppalYung Chong Ho v. Uppal
In an action to recover damages for injury to property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), entered September 18, 2014, which granted the motion of the defendant Harminder Uppal to vacate so much of a judgment of the same court (Cullen, J.), entered May 18, 2009, as, upon an order of the same court (Cullen, J.), dated October 15, 2008, granting the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion pursuant to
The plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injury to their property, which is adjacent to property owned by the defendant Harminder Uppal (hereinafter the defendant). During the course of discovery, the plaintiffs served a notice for discovery and inspection, to which the defendant failed to respond. The parties thereafter appeared in court for a conference, at which time the defendant signed a stipulation agreeing to provide the discovery within 30 days. When the defendant again failed to comply, the plaintiffs moved to compel the defendant to provide the discovery. Upon that motion, the court directed the defendant to provide the discovery within 30 days, and provided that failure to comply would result in her answer being stricken, upon the plaintiffs’ motion for such relief.
In October 2008, due to the defendant‘s continued failure to provide the requested discovery, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion pursuant to
Pursuant to
Here, to the extent the defendant sought to vacate the judgment
Accordingly, the defendant‘s motion to vacate so much of the judgment as was in favor of the plaintiffs and against her should have been denied.
We decline the parties’ respective requests for, inter alia, the imposition of sanctions (see