Feingold v. Roth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Feingold v. Roth

57 A.D.2d 584, 393 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11567

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

DecidedApril 18, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 584 (Feingold v. Roth) 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

Feingold v. Roth, 57 A.D.2d 584, 393 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11567 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover possession of certain bonds, in which a default judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff-respondent and against defendants, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated April 21, 1976, which, after a hearing, denied their motion to vacate their default and for permission to interpose an answer. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted, with the judgment to stand as security. Defendants-appellants shall serve and file an answer within 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Considering the fact that the affidavit in support of the motion asserts that the transfer of moneys alleged by plaintiff-respondent to have been coerced [585]*585was made at her own request, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to preclude a determination on the merits. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Hawkins, Mollen and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover possession of certain bonds, in which a default judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff-respondent and against defendants, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, dated April 21, 1976, which, after a hearing, denied their motion to vacate their default and for permission to interpose an answer. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion granted, with the judgment to stand as security. Defendants-appellants shall serve and file an answer within 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Considering the fact that the affidavit in support of the motion asserts that the transfer of moneys alleged by plaintiff-respondent to have been coerced [585]*585was made at her own request, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to preclude a determination on the merits. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Hawkins, Mollen and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 584, 393 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feingold-v-roth-nyappdiv-1977.