Johnson v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. State of New York

140 A.D.3d 1561, 33 N.Y.S.3d 791

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

DecidedJune 23, 2016

Docket521059

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 140 A.D.3d 1561 (Johnson v. State of New York) 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

Johnson v. State of New York, 140 A.D.3d 1561, 33 N.Y.S.3d 791 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

*1562 McCarthy, J.P.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (DeBow, J.), entered April 23, 2015, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim.

In 2009, claimant, an inmate at Upstate Correctional Facility, filed a claim alleging that he had been denied certain prescribed medication and access to the law library, that a prison official had tampered with his lunch tray and that he had been served improper meals. Defendant answered and asserted numerous affirmative defenses and subsequently sought dismissal of the claim. After claimant failed to submit any papers in opposition to defendant’s motion, the Court of Claims granted the motion upon his default and dismissed the claim. Claimant now appeals.

It is well settled that no appeal is permitted from an order entered upon a party’s default (see CPLR 5511), the sole remedy being to move to vacate the default order and, if that motion is denied, to appeal such denial (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Susan UU. v Scott VV., 119 AD3d 1117, 1118 [2014]; Matter of Jay v Fischer, 102 AD3d 1021, 1021 [2013]; DeLuke v Albany Rest. Supply, Inc., 42 AD3d 601, 601 [2007]). Here, claimant did not file any responsive papers to defendant’s motion, despite evidence in the record establishing that he was properly served with the motion. Accordingly, the Court of Claims properly treated claimant’s failure to respond to defendant’s motion as a default (see Matter of County of Albany [Bowles], 91 AD3d 1132, 1133 [2012]; M & C Bros., Inc. v Torum, 75 AD3d 869, 870-871 [2010]). The record does not reflect that claimant moved to vacate the default order, and his appeal from the default order is not properly before us.

Garry, Lynch, Devine and Aarons, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

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

*1562 McCarthy, J.P.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (DeBow, J.), entered April 23, 2015, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim.

In 2009, claimant, an inmate at Upstate Correctional Facility, filed a claim alleging that he had been denied certain prescribed medication and access to the law library, that a prison official had tampered with his lunch tray and that he had been served improper meals. Defendant answered and asserted numerous affirmative defenses and subsequently sought dismissal of the claim. After claimant failed to submit any papers in opposition to defendant’s motion, the Court of Claims granted the motion upon his default and dismissed the claim. Claimant now appeals.

It is well settled that no appeal is permitted from an order entered upon a party’s default (see CPLR 5511), the sole remedy being to move to vacate the default order and, if that motion is denied, to appeal such denial (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Susan UU. v Scott VV., 119 AD3d 1117, 1118 [2014]; Matter of Jay v Fischer, 102 AD3d 1021, 1021 [2013]; DeLuke v Albany Rest. Supply, Inc., 42 AD3d 601, 601 [2007]). Here, claimant did not file any responsive papers to defendant’s motion, despite evidence in the record establishing that he was properly served with the motion. Accordingly, the Court of Claims properly treated claimant’s failure to respond to defendant’s motion as a default (see Matter of County of Albany [Bowles], 91 AD3d 1132, 1133 [2012]; M & C Bros., Inc. v Torum, 75 AD3d 869, 870-871 [2010]). The record does not reflect that claimant moved to vacate the default order, and his appeal from the default order is not properly before us.

Garry, Lynch, Devine and Aarons, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 A.D.3d 1561, 33 N.Y.S.3d 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack