Duperval v. Hoyle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Duperval v. Hoyle

272 A.D.2d 369, 707 N.Y.S.2d 363, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5109

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

DecidedMay 8, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 272 A.D.2d 369 (Duperval v. Hoyle) 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

Duperval v. Hoyle, 272 A.D.2d 369, 707 N.Y.S.2d 363, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5109 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated June 17, 1999, which granted the defendants’ motion to vacate a judgment of the same court, dated October 1, 1998, entered upon their default in answering, and dismissed the action pursuant to CPLR 3215 (c).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Since the plaintiffs failed to take proceedings for the entry of judgment within one year after the defendants’ default, the Supreme Court did not err in granting the defendants’ motion to vacate the default judgment and in dismissing the complaint (see, CPLR 3215 [c]; cf., Woodward v City of New York, 119 AD2d 749; Rosenbaum v Ace Tr. Corp., 112 AD2d 210). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated June 17, 1999, which granted the defendants’ motion to vacate a judgment of the same court, dated October 1, 1998, entered upon their default in answering, and dismissed the action pursuant to CPLR 3215 (c).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Since the plaintiffs failed to take proceedings for the entry of judgment within one year after the defendants’ default, the Supreme Court did not err in granting the defendants’ motion to vacate the default judgment and in dismissing the complaint (see, CPLR 3215 [c]; cf., Woodward v City of New York, 119 AD2d 749; Rosenbaum v Ace Tr. Corp., 112 AD2d 210). Bracken, J. P., Joy, Thompson, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 369, 707 N.Y.S.2d 363, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duperval-v-hoyle-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack