Justice Charles E. Ramos
Hollander moved to strike Fabers answer, enter a default judgment, and impose monetary sanctions against him. Hollander contended Faber continuously violated court orders, destroyed emails and sold items in a collection of maritime memorabilia belonging to Hollanders fathers, as well as submitted false affidavits regarding his compliance with discovery orders. The court noted Faber was previously sanctioned for failure to produce documents, and was precluded from testifying at trial as to any information he claimed he did not possess. It found Faber engaged in willful non-disclosure, ruling his repeated violations of court orders was inexcusable, and could only be characterized as bad faith. The court stated Fabers conduct revealed an evident disdain for the numerous court orders issued, noting his lack of diligence in attempting to comply with court orders and discovery demands could only be characterized as willfully designed to thwart the discovery process. It concluded Fabers behavior, repeated violations of court orders without a reasonable excuse, and subversion of the discovery process exhibited willful and contumacious conduct. Thus, Hollanders motion to strike Fabers answer and enter a default judgment was granted.
