Bestin Realty, S.A. v. SCI Claridge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bestin Realty, S.A. v. SCI Claridge

128 A.D.3d 503, 7 N.Y.S.3d 896

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

DecidedMay 14, 2015

Docket15125 602705/08

StatusPublished

This text of 128 A.D.3d 503 (Bestin Realty, S.A. v. SCI Claridge) 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

Bestin Realty, S.A. v. SCI Claridge, 128 A.D.3d 503, 7 N.Y.S.3d 896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered October 23, 2013, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (3), because defendant failed to show that plaintiff committed fraud in procuring the judgment. Rather, defendant attempted to show that there was fraud in the underlying transaction (see Nichols v Curtis, 104 AD3d 526, 529 [1st Dept 2013]; Jericho Group, Ltd. v Midtown Dev., L.P., 47 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2008], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 801 [2008]). Concur — Friedman, J.P., Saxe, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered October 23, 2013, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (3), because defendant failed to show that plaintiff committed fraud in procuring the judgment. Rather, defendant attempted to show that there was fraud in the underlying transaction (see Nichols v Curtis, 104 AD3d 526, 529 [1st Dept 2013]; Jericho Group, Ltd. v Midtown Dev., L.P., 47 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2008], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 801 [2008]). Concur — Friedman, J.P., Saxe, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A.D.3d 503, 7 N.Y.S.3d 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bestin-realty-sa-v-sci-claridge-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack