In Gradaille v. City of New York, 52 A.D.3d 279, 858 N.Y.S.2d 600 (1st Dept 2008) the Supreme Court, New York County, originally granted plaintiff's motion to strike City's answer, after defendant repeatedly failed to comply with discovery orders and provided no reasonable explanation. Id. at 281, 858 N.Y.S.2d at 602 (J. McGuire, dissenting). The City moved to reargue, and provided plaintiff with the remaining discovery one week later. Id. at 282, 858 N.Y.S.2d at 602. The Supreme Court granted the motion to reargue, vacating the previous order to strike the answer, and instead imposed the $ 2,500 sanction. Id., 858 N.Y.S.2d at 603. The First Department affirmed, holding that the Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion by vacating the previous order, reasoning that the City's previous production of wrong records was not "willful and contumacious." Id. at 279-80, 858 N.Y.S.2d at 601. Justice McGuire dissented, but argued only for an increased monetary sanction. Id. at 285, 858 N.Y.S.2d at 605 (J. McGuire, dissenting).