32 Gramercy Park Owners Corp. v. Coniff

Civil Practice

New York Law Journal


Justice Donna Mills

Plaintiff cooperative sought to evict shareholder Coniff from her co-op, and cancel her shares arguing objectionable conduct. Coniff moved to compel the co-op to produce certain documents under CPLR 3124. Coniff sought footage of a surveillance camera placed by the co-op on the outside of her apartment. The co-op claimed the cost of copying the footage would be between $23,000 and $94,000 arguing Coniff should bear the cost of such expense. Coniff argued she was entitled to the entire footage, but should not have to bear the cost of copying. The court ruled it would not order the copying of the surveillance footage until Coniff agreed to bear the costs incurred for its production, or unless she was willing to merely view the videos and avoid the expense of copying it. Further, the court ordered the co-op to submit an affidavit attesting to their claims that its failure to produce log books for the building Coniff requested was due to the books being missing, stolen or destroyed. Coniff also requested all communications with shareholders and tenants relating to dogs in the building. It ruled an affidavit should be submitted that the co-op checked its records and turned over all records of tenants with dogs leading to complaints.

What's being said

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

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202591182069

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.