Garcia v. Paulino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garcia v. Paulino

309 A.D.2d 519, 765 N.Y.S.2d 246, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9995

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 2, 2003·Published

Opinion

Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dianne Renwick, J.), entered September 13, 2002 and March 4, 2003, which, inter aha, denied plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion seeking an extension to file his answer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[520] Under all the relevant circumstances, including defendant’s proffer of a reasonable excuse for failing to answer the complaint, the motion court properly exercised its discretion in granting defendant an extension to serve his answer (see CPLR 3012 [d]; Mufalli v Ford Motor Co., 105 AD2d 642, 643-644 [1984]). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe and Williams, JJ.

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

Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dianne Renwick, J.), entered September 13, 2002 and March 4, 2003, which, inter aha, denied plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment and granted defendant’s cross motion seeking an extension to file his answer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[520] Under all the relevant circumstances, including defendant’s proffer of a reasonable excuse for failing to answer the complaint, the motion court properly exercised its discretion in granting defendant an extension to serve his answer (see CPLR 3012 [d]; Mufalli v Ford Motor Co., 105 AD2d 642, 643-644 [1984]). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe and Williams, JJ.

Garcia v. Paulino, 309 A.D.2d 519, 765 N.Y.S.2d 246, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9995 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

309 A.D.2d 519 (Garcia v. Paulino) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related