Caputo v. Peton

13 A.D.3d 474, 787 N.Y.S.2d 92, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15598
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 20, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 13 A.D.3d 474 (Caputo v. Peton) 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
Caputo v. Peton, 13 A.D.3d 474, 787 N.Y.S.2d 92, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

[475]*475In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Angelo J. Sciannameo appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated June 27, 2003, as denied those branches of his motion which were to vacate his default in answering and to compel the plaintiff to accept his answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

To vacate his default, the defendant Angelo J. Sciannameo was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Santiago v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 10 AD3d 393 [2004]; Spells v A&P Supermarkets, 253 AD2d 422 [1998]). It is within the discretion of the Supreme Court, in the interest of justice, to excuse default resulting from law office failure (see CPLR 2005). However, under the circumstances of this case, Sciannameo’s excuse of law office failure was not reasonable (see Kyriacopoulos v Mendon Leasing Corp., 216 AD2d 532, 533 [1995]; see also Weitzenberg v Nassau County Dept. of Recreation & Parks, 282 AD2d 741, 741-742 [2001]). Moreover, Sciannameo failed to offer any excuse for neglecting to oppose the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter judgment based upon the default (see Kyriacopoulos v Mendon Leasing Corp., supra). Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to vacate Sciannameo’s default. Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Adams, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Home Heating Oil Corp. v. Douglas
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018
Taddeo-Amendola v. 970 Assets, LLC
72 A.D.3d 677 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Heidari v. First Advance Funding Corp.
55 A.D.3d 669 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Faga v. Harrison Central School District
40 A.D.3d 690 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Chiarello v. Alessandro
38 A.D.3d 823 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Kurtz v. Mitchell
27 A.D.3d 697 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Dessain v. Franklin
25 A.D.3d 749 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Grinberg v. Fahnestock & Co.
22 A.D.3d 801 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Fekete v. Camp Skwere
16 A.D.3d 544 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 A.D.3d 474, 787 N.Y.S.2d 92, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caputo-v-peton-nyappdiv-2004.