Baez-Ferreira v. Marte
86 A.D.3d 434, 926 N.Y.2d 291
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 7, 2011·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
The appeal is dismissed because no appeal lies from an order granted on default (see Figiel v Met Food, 48 AD3d 330 [2008]; [435] CPLR 5511). Defendant’s remedy was an application to the motion court to vacate the order (see Figiel at 330; CPLR 5015 [a] [1]).
However, were we to reach the merits we would affirm. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Catterson, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and Román, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Baez-Ferreira v. Marte, 86 A.D.3d 434, 926 N.Y.2d 291 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
86 A.D.3d 434 (Baez-Ferreira v. Marte) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hodson v. Vinnie's Farm Market
103 A.D.3d 549 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)