Gallo v. Bubbley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gallo v. Bubbley

20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2782

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 519 (Gallo v. Bubbley) 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

Gallo v. Bubbley, 20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2782 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on April 17,1963, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to eliminate requirement that plaintiff file an undertaking in the sum of $25,000 as a condition to vacating a default judgment entered on the counterclaim; and as thus modified affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-appellant. Although plaintiff appeals from every part of the order, it is not argued that the further condition imposed at Special Term in vacating the judgment, that plaintiff pay the Sheriff’s poundage, should be eliminated; and in any case we would regard this condition as reasonable. Upon plaintiff’s default in pleading defendants applied to the court for a direction that judgment enter in the face amount of the counterclaim. This motion was granted and judgment was directed for the amount demanded in the counterclaim. The counterclaim was not for liquidated damages within sections 485 and 487 of the Civil Practice Act, and judgment could only have been entered on an assessment of damages by the court (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 489, 490; ef. O’Connell v. Schumer, 266 App. Div. 138). Concur—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Yalente, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

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

Order, entered on April 17,1963, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to eliminate requirement that plaintiff file an undertaking in the sum of $25,000 as a condition to vacating a default judgment entered on the counterclaim; and as thus modified affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-appellant. Although plaintiff appeals from every part of the order, it is not argued that the further condition imposed at Special Term in vacating the judgment, that plaintiff pay the Sheriff’s poundage, should be eliminated; and in any case we would regard this condition as reasonable. Upon plaintiff’s default in pleading defendants applied to the court for a direction that judgment enter in the face amount of the counterclaim. This motion was granted and judgment was directed for the amount demanded in the counterclaim. The counterclaim was not for liquidated damages within sections 485 and 487 of the Civil Practice Act, and judgment could only have been entered on an assessment of damages by the court (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 489, 490; ef. O’Connell v. Schumer, 266 App. Div. 138). Concur—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Yalente, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 519, 244 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gallo-v-bubbley-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack