Goldstein v. Barbone

114 A.D.2d 837, 495 N.Y.S.2d 144, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53850
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 4, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 114 A.D.2d 837 (Goldstein v. Barbone) 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
Goldstein v. Barbone, 114 A.D.2d 837, 495 N.Y.S.2d 144, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53850 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

—In a professional malpractice action to recover damages from defendants, an architect and an engineer, plaintiffs appeal from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Buell, J.), dated July 6, 1984, as, upon granting plaintiffs’ motion for a default judgment against defendant Barbone, directed that the assessment of damages against said defendant follow the trial against codefendant Zimmerman, and (2) a further order of the same court (Weiner, J.), dated December 6, 1984, which, inter alia, granted Barbone’s motion to vacate his default.

Order dated December 6, 1984 affirmed, without costs or disbursements, on condition that former counsel for defendant Barbone pays plaintiffs the sum of $750 within 20 days after service upon her of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry; in the event of her failure to so pay, defendant Barbone may make the payment himself. If the payment is made, said defendant’s time to answer is extended until 20 days thereafter, and the appeal from the order dated July 6, 1984 is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements. If the payment is not made, then order dated December 6, 1984 reversed, as a matter of discretion, motion to vacate denied, and order dated July 6, 1984 reversed, insofar as appealed from; plaintiffs are awarded one bill of costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Orange County, for an assessment of damages.

Special Term properly exercised its discretion in vacating defendant Barbone’s default. However, in view of the nature of the underlying excuse, we have imposed an appropriate sanction (see, Mineroff v Macy’s & Co., 97 AD2d 535). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

River Park Associates v. Meyerbank Electric Co.
116 A.D.2d 709 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 A.D.2d 837, 495 N.Y.S.2d 144, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-barbone-nyappdiv-1985.