Corcino v. 4303 Baychester LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corcino v. 4303 Baychester LLC

2017 NY Slip Op 949, 147 A.D.3d 467, 46 N.Y.S.3d 597

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 2017

Docket3045N 310162/11

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 949 (Corcino v. 4303 Baychester LLC) 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

Corcino v. 4303 Baychester LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op 949, 147 A.D.3d 467, 46 N.Y.S.3d 597 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered December 7, 2015, which granted the motion of defendants 4303 Baychester LLC, 505 East 178 LLC, 983 East 181 LLC and 1064 Ward LLC (respondents) to vacate a default judgment entered as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion in vacating the default judgment as against respondents, because the record supports the conclusion that their failure to appear was the result of law office failure by their attorney (see Jackson v Pelletier, 160 AD2d 604 [1st Dept 1990]). The fact that respondents may have delayed in seeking vacatur is not dispositive, because the court has the inherent power to consider the application (see Hunter v Enquirer/Star, Inc., 210 AD2d 32, 33 [1st Dept 1994]). Plaintiff has also failed to demonstrate any prejudice from vacatur of the default judgment (see Mutual Mar. Off., Inc. v Joy Constr. Corp., 39 AD3d 417, 419 [1st Dept 2007]).

Furthermore, respondents set forth a meritorious defense to the complaint’s allegations that they engaged in fraudulent conveyances to shield defendant New Line Realty III Corp. from paying a judgment that plaintiff’s decedent obtained against it in a personal injury action (see e.g. Blakeslee v Rabinor, 182 AD2d 390, 392 [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 82 NY2d 655 [1993]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered December 7, 2015, which granted the motion of defendants 4303 Baychester LLC, 505 East 178 LLC, 983 East 181 LLC and 1064 Ward LLC (respondents) to vacate a default judgment entered as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion in vacating the default judgment as against respondents, because the record supports the conclusion that their failure to appear was the result of law office failure by their attorney (see Jackson v Pelletier, 160 AD2d 604 [1st Dept 1990]). The fact that respondents may have delayed in seeking vacatur is not dispositive, because the court has the inherent power to consider the application (see Hunter v Enquirer/Star, Inc., 210 AD2d 32, 33 [1st Dept 1994]). Plaintiff has also failed to demonstrate any prejudice from vacatur of the default judgment (see Mutual Mar. Off., Inc. v Joy Constr. Corp., 39 AD3d 417, 419 [1st Dept 2007]).

Furthermore, respondents set forth a meritorious defense to the complaint’s allegations that they engaged in fraudulent conveyances to shield defendant New Line Realty III Corp. from paying a judgment that plaintiff’s decedent obtained against it in a personal injury action (see e.g. Blakeslee v Rabinor, 182 AD2d 390, 392 [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 82 NY2d 655 [1993]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 949, 147 A.D.3d 467, 46 N.Y.S.3d 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corcino-v-4303-baychester-llc-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack