Acker v. Van Epps

45 A.D.3d 1104, 845 N.Y.S.2d 561
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 2007·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Peters, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered May 3, 2007 in Albany County, which granted defendants’ motion to vacate a default judgment entered against them.

On August 16, 2004, plaintiffs allegedly sustained damage to real and personal property located in the Town of Guilderland, Albany County. In December 2006, plaintiffs commenced the present action against defendant Geoffrey B. Van Epps and defendants Hiawatha Trails Golf Course, Inc. and Hiawatha Trails, LLC—of which Van Epps is the principal and sole shareholder—by summons and complaint personally served upon Van Epps, claiming that water run off from their property caused plaintiffs’ property damage. Defendants failed to serve an answer or appear in the action and plaintiffs moved for a default judgment. There being no opposition, Supreme Court granted the motion. Thereafter, defendants promptly moved to vacate the default judgment, proffering the excuse that “the internal operations of the [defendants’ insurance underwriters failed,” and asserting as a defense a claim that weather conditions and road construction caused or contributed to plaintiffs’ property damage. Supreme Court granted defendants’ motion and plaintiffs now appeal.

“Vacatur of a default judgment lies within the discretion of the trial court, a determination that should not be disturbed unless it reflects an ‘improvident exercise of discretion’ ” (Chase Manhattan Automotive Fin. Corp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 272 AD2d 772, 773 [2000], quoting Lucas v United Helpers Cedars Nursing Home, 239 AD2d 853, 853 [1997]; see Kranenburg v Butwell, 34 AD3d 1005, 1006 [2006]). In order to vacate a default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), the movant must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see Kranenburg v Butwell, 34 AD3d at 1006; Chase Manhattan Automotive Fin. Corp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 272 AD2d at 773-774). Here, the record demonstrates that upon receiving the summons and complaint, Van Epps contacted his insurance agent, who immediately notified defendants’ insurance underwriter, Fairway Underwriters, by fax. Van Epps stated that he did not receive any further communication or correspondence concerning the action until he was notified of the default judg[1106] merit against defendants in early March 2007,

Footnotes

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

Acker v. Van Epps, 45 A.D.3d 1104, 845 N.Y.S.2d 561 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

45 A.D.3d 1104 (Acker v. Van Epps) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Puchner v. Nastke
91 A.D.3d 1261 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Toyota Motor Credit Corp. v. Impressive Auto Center, Inc.
80 A.D.3d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Dinstber v. Allstate Insurance
75 A.D.3d 957 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Siwek v. Phillips
71 A.D.3d 469 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
H.E.A.T. Enterprises, Ltd. v. Willette
57 A.D.3d 1025 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)