Baron v. Earl I. Wadhams, Inc.

139 A.D.2d 956
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 8, 1988·No. Appeal No. 2·Published

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Special Term properly exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the order, entered on default and dismissing the action on the ground of law office failure (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; 2005). CPLR 2005 permits a court to excuse a default for law office failure; however, there must be a reasonable excuse for the delay and an affidavit of merits (see, Fidelity & Deposit Co. v Andersen &

[957]*957Co., 60 NY2d 693, 695); plaintiff failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay to demonstrate that her cause of action has merit. (Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County, Reed, J. — vacate default.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Den-man, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Baron v. Earl I. Wadhams, Inc., 139 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

139 A.D.2d 956 (Baron v. Earl I. Wadhams, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

FID. & DEPOSIT CO. OF MARYLAND v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
455 N.E.2d 1259 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)