Hannah v Chorney
2010 NY Slip Op 09000 [79 AD3d 468]
December 7, 2010
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, February 16, 2011


Joshua Hannah et al., Appellants,
v
Gail Chorney, M.D., et al.,Respondents.

[*1]Daniel P. Buttafuoco & Associates, PLLC, Woodbury (Ellen Buchholz of counsel), forappellant.

Ellenberg & Partners, LLP, New York (Michael A. Ellenberg of counsel), for Gail Chorney, M.D.,respondent.

Mauro Goldberg & Lilling LLP, Great Neck (Anthony F. DeStefano of counsel), for New YorkPresbyterian Hospital and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered April 30, 2009, which, to theextent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff's motion to strike defendants' answers as asanction for spoliation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The absence of the operative report did not deprive plaintiff of means for establishing a prima faciecase (see e.g. Orloski v McCarthy, 274 AD2d 633, 635-636 [2000], lv denied 95NY2d 767 [2000]; cf. Gray v Jaeger, 17AD3d 286 [2005]). Therefore, striking the answers would have constituted too drastic a remedy.The court properly granted plaintiff's alternative request for dismissal of the action.

We have considered the parties' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, Richter, Abdus-Salaam and RomÁn, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.