Credit Car Leasing Corp. v. Elan Group Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Credit Car Leasing Corp. v. Elan Group Corp.

185 A.D.2d 109, 586 N.Y.S.2d 3, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8743

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 185 A.D.2d 109 (Credit Car Leasing Corp. v. Elan Group Corp.) 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

Credit Car Leasing Corp. v. Elan Group Corp., 185 A.D.2d 109, 586 N.Y.S.2d 3, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8743 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Saxe, J.), entered April 22, 1991, which denied defendant-appellant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS court that jurisdiction was obtained over defendant-appellant, service of process having been made in accordance with the parties’ lease by certified mail at the address designated in the lease. It is well settled that a person who has agreed to receive a particular mode of notification of legal proceedings should be bound by a judgment in which that particular mode of notification has been followed (Pennoyer v Neff, 95 US 714, 735; Gilbert v Burnstine, 255 NY 348, 355-356). Since any purported oral modification would be in contravention of the lease (General Obligations Law § 15-301), and since defendant offered neither a meritorious defense nor [110]*110a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to vacate his default (see, DFI Communications v Golden Penn Theatre Ticket Serv., 87 AD2d 778), it was not an abuse of discretion for the IAS court to refuse defendant relief from the default (CPLR 5015; M.D. & Son Contr. v American Props., 179 AD2d 519). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Saxe, J.), entered April 22, 1991, which denied defendant-appellant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS court that jurisdiction was obtained over defendant-appellant, service of process having been made in accordance with the parties’ lease by certified mail at the address designated in the lease. It is well settled that a person who has agreed to receive a particular mode of notification of legal proceedings should be bound by a judgment in which that particular mode of notification has been followed (Pennoyer v Neff, 95 US 714, 735; Gilbert v Burnstine, 255 NY 348, 355-356). Since any purported oral modification would be in contravention of the lease (General Obligations Law § 15-301), and since defendant offered neither a meritorious defense nor [110]*110a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to vacate his default (see, DFI Communications v Golden Penn Theatre Ticket Serv., 87 AD2d 778), it was not an abuse of discretion for the IAS court to refuse defendant relief from the default (CPLR 5015; M.D. & Son Contr. v American Props., 179 AD2d 519). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 A.D.2d 109, 586 N.Y.S.2d 3, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/credit-car-leasing-corp-v-elan-group-corp-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack