Bank of New York v. Segui

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bank of New York v. Segui

42 A.D.3d 555, 840 N.Y.S.2d 408

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 31, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 42 A.D.3d 555 (Bank of New York v. Segui) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of New York v. Segui, 42 A.D.3d 555, 840 N.Y.S.2d 408 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Margarita Segui appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruditzky, J.), dated March 22, 2006, as denied her motion, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court, entered July 12, 2004, upon her default in appearing or answering.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Vacatur of a default judgment requires the moving defendant to establish both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]; Credit-Based Asset Servicing & Securitization v Chaudry, 304 AD2d 708 [2003]; Mary Immaculate Hosp. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 296 AD2d 385, 386 [2002]). The appellant failed to offer a reasonable excuse for her failure to answer or appear in the action and did not set forth the existence of a meritorious defense to foreclosure. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied her motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale (see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., supra; Credit-Based Asset Servicing & Securitization v Chaudry, supra).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit Rivera, J.E, Florio, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Margarita Segui appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruditzky, J.), dated March 22, 2006, as denied her motion, pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court, entered July 12, 2004, upon her default in appearing or answering.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Vacatur of a default judgment requires the moving defendant to establish both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]; Credit-Based Asset Servicing & Securitization v Chaudry, 304 AD2d 708 [2003]; Mary Immaculate Hosp. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 296 AD2d 385, 386 [2002]). The appellant failed to offer a reasonable excuse for her failure to answer or appear in the action and did not set forth the existence of a meritorious defense to foreclosure. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied her motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale (see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., supra; Credit-Based Asset Servicing & Securitization v Chaudry, supra).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit Rivera, J.E, Florio, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.3d 555, 840 N.Y.S.2d 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-new-york-v-segui-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack