Eibert v. Eibert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eibert v. Eibert

306 A.D.2d 603, 759 N.Y.S.2d 711, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360

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

DecidedJune 5, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 306 A.D.2d 603 (Eibert v. Eibert) 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

Eibert v. Eibert, 306 A.D.2d 603, 759 N.Y.S.2d 711, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Rogers, J.), ordering, inter alia, equitable distribution of the parties’ marital property, entered February 19, 2002 in St. Lawrence County, upon a decision of the court.

In the midst of the trial in this divorce action, defendant intentionally absented herself from the courtroom when it became apparent that she was not going to succeed in her efforts to obtain physical custody of the parties’ two children. As a consequence, she did not contest any issue before Supreme Court, including equitable distribution of the parties’ assets. Thereafter, Supreme Court granted plaintiff a judgment of divorce on the grounds outlined in his complaint and also, inter alia, equitably distributed the parties’ property. This being the case, defendant’s appeal from the judgment of divorce must be dismissed since no appeal lies from a judgment entered upon default (see Albert v Schoenlein, 229 AD2d 813, 814 [1996]). Rather, her remedy is a motion to vacate the default upon a showing of a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see Mancino v Mancino, 251 AD2d 963 [1998]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

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

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Rogers, J.), ordering, inter alia, equitable distribution of the parties’ marital property, entered February 19, 2002 in St. Lawrence County, upon a decision of the court.

In the midst of the trial in this divorce action, defendant intentionally absented herself from the courtroom when it became apparent that she was not going to succeed in her efforts to obtain physical custody of the parties’ two children. As a consequence, she did not contest any issue before Supreme Court, including equitable distribution of the parties’ assets. Thereafter, Supreme Court granted plaintiff a judgment of divorce on the grounds outlined in his complaint and also, inter alia, equitably distributed the parties’ property. This being the case, defendant’s appeal from the judgment of divorce must be dismissed since no appeal lies from a judgment entered upon default (see Albert v Schoenlein, 229 AD2d 813, 814 [1996]). Rather, her remedy is a motion to vacate the default upon a showing of a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see Mancino v Mancino, 251 AD2d 963 [1998]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 A.D.2d 603, 759 N.Y.S.2d 711, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eibert-v-eibert-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack