| Lippman v Goodman |
| 2018 NY Slip Op 51085(U) [60 Misc 3d 136(A)] |
| Decided on July 6, 2018 |
| Appellate Term, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Roy Lippman, appellant pro se. Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, P.A., for respondents (no brief filed).
Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Jodi Orlow, J.), entered September 11, 2015. The order denied plaintiff's motion to compel discovery.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff appeals from an order which denied his motion to compel discovery. CPLR 3124 states that, "[i]f a person fails to respond to or comply with any request, notice, interrogatory, demand, question or order under" article 31, "the party seeking disclosure may move to compel compliance or a response." Here, plaintiff has not alleged, let alone demonstrated, that he served any such demand or request, and therefore the relief sought by plaintiff is not available to him.
Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
WESTON, J.P., ELLIOT and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.