La Vin v. La Vin
279 A.D. 873, 110 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5157
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 18, 1952·Published·Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
Since respondent’s default was deliberate and intentional, and there was no adequate showing of a meritorious defense, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion. (Colonial Fuel Corp. v. Kahn, 214 App. Div. 83; Booraem v. Gibbons, 263 App. Div. 665; Scordo v. Terrell, 275 App. Div. 940; Chaplin v. Selznick, 186 Misc. 66, 68-69.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Wenzel, MacCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur. [See post, p. 1088; 280 App. Div. 895.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
La Vin v. La Vin, 279 A.D. 873, 110 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5157 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).
279 A.D. 873 (La Vin v. La Vin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In re Golenbock
13 A.D.2d 178 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1961)
Heller v. Ward
10 A.D.2d 633 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1960)
Domine v. State
1 Misc. 2d 846 (New York State Court of Claims, 1956)
Cohen v. La Vin
210 F.2d 550 (Second Circuit, 1954)