H.H. Mink Co. v. G & T Terminal Packaging Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

H.H. Mink Co. v. G & T Terminal Packaging Co.

89 A.D.2d 821, 453 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17958

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

DecidedJuly 9, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 89 A.D.2d 821 (H.H. Mink Co. v. G & T Terminal Packaging Co.) 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

H.H. Mink Co. v. G & T Terminal Packaging Co., 89 A.D.2d 821, 453 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17958 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified and, as modified, affirmed, with costs to appellant, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from the part of an order directing that it file a bond as a condition of vacating a default judgment. We find no showing of circumstances that would require security {Mark IV Homes v Evans Gardens, 57 AD2d 701). Plaintiff’s counsel argues that it was proper for the court to require security since the court might have determined that the default was intentional. This argument fails since only excusable, hence unintentional, defaults may be vacated and plaintiff has not appealed from the order vacating the default judgment (see Astrocom/Marlux v Lafayette Radio Electronics Corp., 61 AD2d 1064,1065). Moreover, there is no indication that the default was intentional. The same considerations apply to plaintiff’s argument concerning lack of a meritorious defense. The order is modified, therefore, by deleting the requirement that a bond be posted. Since defendant has no objection, the judgment should stand as security. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wagner, J. — vacate default judgment.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified and, as modified, affirmed, with costs to appellant, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from the part of an order directing that it file a bond as a condition of vacating a default judgment. We find no showing of circumstances that would require security {Mark IV Homes v Evans Gardens, 57 AD2d 701). Plaintiff’s counsel argues that it was proper for the court to require security since the court might have determined that the default was intentional. This argument fails since only excusable, hence unintentional, defaults may be vacated and plaintiff has not appealed from the order vacating the default judgment (see Astrocom/Marlux v Lafayette Radio Electronics Corp., 61 AD2d 1064,1065). Moreover, there is no indication that the default was intentional. The same considerations apply to plaintiff’s argument concerning lack of a meritorious defense. The order is modified, therefore, by deleting the requirement that a bond be posted. Since defendant has no objection, the judgment should stand as security. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wagner, J. — vacate default judgment.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.2d 821, 453 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hh-mink-co-v-g-t-terminal-packaging-co-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack