Chrysler First Financial Services Corp. of America v. Burse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chrysler First Financial Services Corp. of America v. Burse

210 A.D.2d 947, 621 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13419

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 210 A.D.2d 947 (Chrysler First Financial Services Corp. of America v. Burse) 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

Chrysler First Financial Services Corp. of America v. Burse, 210 A.D.2d 947, 621 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13419 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly vacated the default judgment against defendant James D. Burse. That judgment was a nullity because it was not entered in compliance with CPLR 308 (4) (see, Marazita v Nelbach, 91 AD2d 604).

The court erred, however, in failing to vacate the default judgment against defendant Patricia Burse based on plaintiffs failure to comply with the five-day notice requirement of CPLR 3215 (g) (1) (cf., Q.P.I. Rests. v Slevin, 93 AD2d 767, appeal dismissed 60 NY2d 676). (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Scudder, J.—Vacate Default Judgment.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly vacated the default judgment against defendant James D. Burse. That judgment was a nullity because it was not entered in compliance with CPLR 308 (4) (see, Marazita v Nelbach, 91 AD2d 604).

The court erred, however, in failing to vacate the default judgment against defendant Patricia Burse based on plaintiffs failure to comply with the five-day notice requirement of CPLR 3215 (g) (1) (cf., Q.P.I. Rests. v Slevin, 93 AD2d 767, appeal dismissed 60 NY2d 676). (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Scudder, J.—Vacate Default Judgment.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 947, 621 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chrysler-first-financial-services-corp-of-america-v-burse-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack