Acevedo v. New York City Transit Authority

16 A.D.3d 144, 789 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2198
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 3, 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul A. Victor, J.), entered September 12, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s failure to timely answer the complaint was adequately explained as attributable to excusable law office failure and resulted in no discernible prejudice to plaintiff (see Leary v Pou Poune, Inc., 273 AD2d 8 [2000]). In view of this, and the showing of a meritorious defense made out by the affidavit of defendant’s motorman, the default was properly vacated. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Marlow and Nardelli, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Acevedo v. New York City Transit Authority, 16 A.D.3d 144, 789 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2198 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

16 A.D.3d 144 (Acevedo v. New York City Transit Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kapitanova v. New York City Tr. Auth.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016