Hollander v. Faber

NEW YORK COUNTY
Civil Practice

New York Law Journal

   |0 Comments

Justice Charles E. Ramos

Hollander moved to strike Faber’s answer, enter a default judgment, and impose monetary sanctions against him. Hollander contended Faber continuously violated court orders, destroyed emails and sold items in a collection of maritime memorabilia belonging to Hollander’s father’s, as well as submitted false affidavits regarding his compliance with discovery orders. The court noted Faber was previously sanctioned for failure to produce documents, and was precluded from testifying at trial as to any information he claimed he did not possess. It found Faber engaged in willful non-disclosure, ruling his repeated violations of court orders was inexcusable, and could only be characterized as bad faith. The court stated Faber’s conduct revealed an “evident disdain for the numerous” court orders issued, noting his lack of diligence in attempting to comply with court orders and discovery demands could only be characterized as “willfully designed to thwart the discovery process.” It concluded Faber’s behavior, repeated violations of court orders without a reasonable excuse, and subversion of the discovery process exhibited willful and contumacious conduct. Thus, Hollander’s motion to strike Faber’s answer and enter a default judgment was granted.
 

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202582980380

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.