On January 31, 2024, the Second Department issued a decision in Mention v. Archbishop Stepinac High Sch., 2024 NY Slip Op. 00416, dismissing a complaint for failure fully to provide discovery, explaining:
A conditional order of preclusion requires a party to provide certain discovery by a date certain, or face the sanctions specified in the order. Where a party fails to comply with the terms of a conditional order prior to the deadline imposed therein, the conditional order becomes absolute. To be relieved from the adverse impact of a conditional order, a defaulting plaintiff must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the failure to comply with the order and the existence of a potentially meritorious action.
Here, the plaintiff failed to comply with the conditional order by providing the required authorizations by May 28, 2021. Further, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his failure to comply with the conditional order, and he made no effort to demonstrate a potentially meritorious cause of action.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly directed dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).