Calzati v. Kaufman Astoria Studios, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Calzati v. Kaufman Astoria Studios, Inc.

279 A.D.2d 443, 719 N.Y.S.2d 594, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 193

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 443 (Calzati v. Kaufman Astoria Studios, Inc.) 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

Calzati v. Kaufman Astoria Studios, Inc., 279 A.D.2d 443, 719 N.Y.S.2d 594, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 193 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 26 for the entry of a judgment upon a default in the payment of an arbitration award, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated November 24, 1999, which denied its motion to vacate the judgment entered against it, upon its failure to pay the award.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the judgment entered against it pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 26 was procured as a result of fraud, misrepresentation, or other improper conduct on the part of the plaintiff. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion to vacate the judgment (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [3]). Florio, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 26 for the entry of a judgment upon a default in the payment of an arbitration award, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated November 24, 1999, which denied its motion to vacate the judgment entered against it, upon its failure to pay the award.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the judgment entered against it pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 26 was procured as a result of fraud, misrepresentation, or other improper conduct on the part of the plaintiff. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion to vacate the judgment (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [3]). Florio, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 443, 719 N.Y.S.2d 594, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calzati-v-kaufman-astoria-studios-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack