Gabriel v. Town of Carmel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gabriel v. Town of Carmel

48 A.D.2d 683, 368 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9712

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

DecidedMay 19, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 683 (Gabriel v. Town of Carmel) 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

Gabriel v. Town of Carmel, 48 A.D.2d 683, 368 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9712 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages caused by flooding, allegedly due to negligence in the construction and maintenance of certain culverts and storm sewers, the appeal is from an order. of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated June 4, 1974, which denied a motion to vacate a default judgment. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. Although the affidavit of merits could have particularized the facts under which it is claimed that there is no liability, the Town of Carmel shows a meritorious defense to the action under the present status of the law (see Beck v City of New York, 23 Misc 2d 1036, affd 16 AD2d 809). Plaintiffs concede that an excusable default was shown. Therefore, and in light of the strong policy that matters be disposed of on the merits (Colgar Enterprises v Di Giaimo, 41 AD2d 654), the motion to vacate the default should have been granted. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages caused by flooding, allegedly due to negligence in the construction and maintenance of certain culverts and storm sewers, the appeal is from an order. of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated June 4, 1974, which denied a motion to vacate a default judgment. Order reversed, without costs, and motion granted. Although the affidavit of merits could have particularized the facts under which it is claimed that there is no liability, the Town of Carmel shows a meritorious defense to the action under the present status of the law (see Beck v City of New York, 23 Misc 2d 1036, affd 16 AD2d 809). Plaintiffs concede that an excusable default was shown. Therefore, and in light of the strong policy that matters be disposed of on the merits (Colgar Enterprises v Di Giaimo, 41 AD2d 654), the motion to vacate the default should have been granted. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 683, 368 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gabriel-v-town-of-carmel-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack