Dartmouth Plan, Inc. v. Caldwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dartmouth Plan, Inc. v. Caldwell

81 A.D.2d 628, 440 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11129

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

DecidedApril 20, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 81 A.D.2d 628 (Dartmouth Plan, Inc. v. Caldwell) 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

Dartmouth Plan, Inc. v. Caldwell, 81 A.D.2d 628, 440 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to foreclose a mortgage, defendant Emma Caldwell appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated November 13, 1980, which denied her motion to set aside the default judgment entered against her. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted on condition that appellant serve her answer upon plaintiff within 10 days after service upon her of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. In the event the condition is not complied with, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Appellant showed excusable neglect and alleged defenses which, if proven, would be meritorious. In view of the policy in favor of disposition of actions on the merits, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for Special Term to deny appellant’s motion to vacate the default judgment and reject the defenses at this juncture. Margett, J.P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Thompson, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to foreclose a mortgage, defendant Emma Caldwell appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated November 13, 1980, which denied her motion to set aside the default judgment entered against her. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted on condition that appellant serve her answer upon plaintiff within 10 days after service upon her of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. In the event the condition is not complied with, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Appellant showed excusable neglect and alleged defenses which, if proven, would be meritorious. In view of the policy in favor of disposition of actions on the merits, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for Special Term to deny appellant’s motion to vacate the default judgment and reject the defenses at this juncture. Margett, J.P., O’Connor, Weinstein and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 628, 440 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dartmouth-plan-inc-v-caldwell-nyappdiv-1981.