Gully v Varghese

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

Law :: Justia https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2026/2026-ny-slip-op-50864-u.html 3/13 After plaintiff made her reply submission, defendants filed a reply affirmation of counsel, in which they point out that the case citations set forth in plaintiff's filings do not exist, and argues that plaintiff's use of such false citations renders her entire summary judgment motion frivolous (Attorney Affirmation in Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Cross-Motion for SJ, dated April 8, 2026 [Def Reply Aff] ¶¶ 6-8). They also note that the Court may sanction plaintiff sua sponte under Part 130 of the Rules of the Chief Administrative Judge for using false case citations (id. ¶¶ 11-16). In response, plaintiff sought permission to submit a sur-reply so that she could be heard on defendants' application for sanctions. I granted the motion, and in her sur-reply plaintiff acknowledged that the cases she purports to cite do not exist, but she asserts that she included them without knowing that they were inaccurate (Sur-Reply, dated April 13, 2026 ["Sur-Reply"] ¶¶ 1-3). Plaintiff further contends that her use of non-existent case citations was not completely without merit or otherwise frivolous under 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, and defendants were not prejudiced thereby (id. ¶¶ 2-4).

Authorities cited in the passage: 22 NYCRR 130-1.1