Flex Knit, Inc. v. Jo Da Textile(s), Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Flex Knit, Inc. v. Jo Da Textile(s), Inc.

60 A.D.2d 970, 401 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10036

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.2d 970 (Flex Knit, Inc. v. Jo Da Textile(s), Inc.) 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

Flex Knit, Inc. v. Jo Da Textile(s), Inc., 60 A.D.2d 970, 401 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10036 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion to open default judgment granted in accordance with the following memorandum: In light of the letter by plaintiffs counsel to defendants’ counsel agreeing to stipulate an extension of time for defendants to answer upon a showing that the name of the defendant corporation was incorrectly stated in the summons and complaint, which appears to have been shown; and [971]*971some indication in the record that plaintiffs claim may not be completely "solid”, we think that Special Term should have granted the motion to open the default to the extent of permitting defendants to answer or otherwise plead and have the issues in the case determined in normal course, subject only to permitting the default judgment to stand as security for such indebtedness of the defendants as plaintiff may establish upon the trial. (Appeal from order of Onondaga Supreme Court—vacate default, etc.) Present—Marsh, P. J., Dillon, Hancock, Jr., Denman and Witmer, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion to open default judgment granted in accordance with the following memorandum: In light of the letter by plaintiffs counsel to defendants’ counsel agreeing to stipulate an extension of time for defendants to answer upon a showing that the name of the defendant corporation was incorrectly stated in the summons and complaint, which appears to have been shown; and [971]*971some indication in the record that plaintiffs claim may not be completely "solid”, we think that Special Term should have granted the motion to open the default to the extent of permitting defendants to answer or otherwise plead and have the issues in the case determined in normal course, subject only to permitting the default judgment to stand as security for such indebtedness of the defendants as plaintiff may establish upon the trial. (Appeal from order of Onondaga Supreme Court—vacate default, etc.) Present—Marsh, P. J., Dillon, Hancock, Jr., Denman and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 970, 401 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flex-knit-inc-v-jo-da-textiles-inc-nyappdiv-1978.