Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Berra v. Mughal

Berra v. Mughal

228 A.D.2d 401, 643 N.Y.2d 423, 643 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6218
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 3, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 228 A.D.2d 401 (Berra v. Mughal) 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
Berra v. Mughal, 228 A.D.2d 401, 643 N.Y.2d 423, 643 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6218 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

[402]*402Inasmuch as the defendants failed to establish a meritorious defense, the Supreme Court properly denied their motion to vacate the judgment entered upon their default in answering the complaint (see, CPLR 317, 5015 [a]; Fennell v Mason, 204 AD2d 599; Halali v Gabbay, 223 AD2d 623). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Tivoli v. Expedite Mediation Arbitration Services, Inc.
269 A.D.2d 442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
228 A.D.2d 401, 643 N.Y.2d 423, 643 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berra-v-mughal-nyappdiv-1996.