| Rachimi v Sacher |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 04275 [172 AD3d 636] |
| May 30, 2019 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| Lorraine Rachimi, Respondent, v Howard L. Sacher, D.O., Appellant, et al., Defendants. |
Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, LLP, Lake Success (Nicholas Tam of counsel), for appellant.
Koss & Schonfeld, LLP, New York (Jacob J. Schindelheim of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith N. McMahon, J.), entered March 22, 2018, which granted defendant Howard L. Sacher, D.O.'s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 to the extent of issuing a conditional order of preclusion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The determination of the motion court was a provident exercise of discretion (see generally Gomez v New York City Hous. Auth., 217 AD2d 110, 114 [1st Dept 1995]). In light of the preference that matters be decided on the merits, a conditional order of preclusion was within the ambit of available remedies for the trial court to impose. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Gische, Webber, Gesmer, Moulton, JJ.