Commonwealth Metal Corp. v. Paragon Auto Radiator Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Commonwealth Metal Corp. v. Paragon Auto Radiator Corp.

128 A.D.2d 751, 513 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 44435

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 23, 1987·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover for goods sold and delivered, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated July 12, 1985, as denied their motion to vacate a default judgment entered against them on March 23, 1983, except to the extent of directing a reassessment of damages.

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

The defendants’ contention that personal jurisdiction was never properly acquired over the individual defendants is without merit since the defendant Lillian Newman was personally served and defendant Seymour Newman stipulated to appear "as if he were timely personally served with said papers”. Moreover, nothing occurred during the course of this proceeding to vitiate the personal jurisdiction over both these defendants.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in declining to vacate the default judgment entered against the defendants since they failed to demonstrate any valid excuse for their default (see, Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138; Tandy Computer Leasing v Video X Home Lib., 124 AD2d 530; Awad v Severino, 122 AD2d 242; see also, Oberlein v City of New York, 51 AD2d 805). Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover for goods sold and delivered, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated July 12, 1985, as denied their motion to vacate a default judgment entered against them on March 23, 1983, except to the extent of directing a reassessment of damages.

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

The defendants’ contention that personal jurisdiction was never properly acquired over the individual defendants is without merit since the defendant Lillian Newman was personally served and defendant Seymour Newman stipulated to appear "as if he were timely personally served with said papers”. Moreover, nothing occurred during the course of this proceeding to vitiate the personal jurisdiction over both these defendants.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in declining to vacate the default judgment entered against the defendants since they failed to demonstrate any valid excuse for their default (see, Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138; Tandy Computer Leasing v Video X Home Lib., 124 AD2d 530; Awad v Severino, 122 AD2d 242; see also, Oberlein v City of New York, 51 AD2d 805). Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Commonwealth Metal Corp. v. Paragon Auto Radiator Corp., 128 A.D.2d 751, 513 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 44435 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

128 A.D.2d 751 (Commonwealth Metal Corp. v. Paragon Auto Radiator Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related