Homan v. Grandview Contracting Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Homan v. Grandview Contracting Corp.

284 A.D.2d 428, 726 N.Y.S.2d 568, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6305

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

DecidedJune 18, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 284 A.D.2d 428 (Homan v. Grandview Contracting Corp.) 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

Homan v. Grandview Contracting Corp., 284 A.D.2d 428, 726 N.Y.S.2d 568, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6305 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated May 24, 2000, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated April 21, 1999, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), upon their default in opposing the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To vacate an order entered on default, a plaintiff must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Waaland v Weiss, 228 AD2d 435). The plaintiffs did not demonstrate either. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated May 24, 2000, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated April 21, 1999, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the injured plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), upon their default in opposing the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To vacate an order entered on default, a plaintiff must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Waaland v Weiss, 228 AD2d 435). The plaintiffs did not demonstrate either. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 428, 726 N.Y.S.2d 568, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/homan-v-grandview-contracting-corp-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack