Filed Date: 2/8/2011
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
The imposition of sanctions was warranted in light of the “frivolous conduct” engaged in by defendants’ counsel in connection with this action (22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a], [c]). The record demonstrates that counsel blatantly disregarded the court’s preclusion ruling and advanced meritless arguments during trial and her summation (see Matter of Rachel’s Trousseau [Warshaw Woolen Assoc.], 249 AD2d 148 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 810 [1998]). Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Freedman and Richter, JJ.