Campbell v. Ghafoor

8 A.D.3d 316, 777 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7844
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 7, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 8 A.D.3d 316 (Campbell v. Ghafoor) 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
Campbell v. Ghafoor, 8 A.D.3d 316, 777 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7844 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

[317]*317In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Carson, J.), dated October 30, 2003, which granted the defendants’ motion to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 11, 2003, granting their motion for leave to enter judgment upon the defendants’ failure to appear or answer and setting the matter down for an inquest on damages.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion to vacate is denied, and the order dated July 11, 2003, is reinstated.

A party seeking to vacate a default in appearing or answering must demonstrate a justifiable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]). The bare allegation by the defendants’ attorney in an affirmation that the delay was caused by the defendants’ insurance carrier was insufficient to excuse the over one-year delay in answering the complaint (see Kaplinsky v Mazor, 307 AD2d 916 [2003]; Cilindrello v Rayabin, 297 AD2d 699 [2002]; Andrade v Ranginwala, 297 AD2d 691 [2002]; Warn v Seung K. Choi-Lee, 291 AD2d 490 [2002]). Furthermore, the defendants failed to demonstrate that they have a meritorious defense (see Meretskaya v Logozzo, 2 AD3d 599 [2003]; Rieman v Smith, 302 AD2d 510 [2003]; Russo v Scibetti, 298 AD2d 514 [2002]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants’ motion to vacate the order. Altman, J.P., S. Miller, Schmidt, Cozier and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Goldstein v. Ilaz
2022 NY Slip Op 04154 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Rochdale Ins. Co. v. Fairview Nursing Care Ctr., Inc.
2020 NY Slip Op 04982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Sargsyan v. Kaieteur Constr., Inc.
2019 NY Slip Op 2576 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Blazo v. Wyckoff Heights Medical Center
125 A.D.3d 705 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Allstate Insurance v. City of White Plains
78 A.D.3d 691 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Martinez v. D'Alessandro Custom Builders & Demolition, Inc.
52 A.D.3d 786 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Lemberger v. Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, Inc.
33 A.D.3d 671 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Harcztark v. Drive Variety, Inc.
21 A.D.3d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Krieger v. Cohan
18 A.D.3d 823 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Hegarty v. Ballee
18 A.D.3d 706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Pampalone v. Giant Building Maintenance, Inc.
17 A.D.3d 556 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
New York University Hospital Tisch Institute v. Merchants Mutual Insurance
15 A.D.3d 554 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Juseinoski v. Board of Education
15 A.D.3d 353 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Robinson v. 1068 Flatbush Realty, Inc.
10 A.D.3d 716 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 A.D.3d 316, 777 N.Y.S.2d 718, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-ghafoor-nyappdiv-2004.