Plaintiff argues that defendant's disobedience of a prior "self-executing" compliance order automatically resulted in the preclusion of defendant's trial testimony, and that it was therefore error to direct the taking of defendant's deposition. No basis exists to disturb the motion court's implicit finding that defendant's failure to make himself available for deposition in accordance with the compliance order was not willful or contumacious, and that defendant was not otherwise...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
