Lee v. Sottile

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lee v. Sottile

276 A.D.2d 597, 714 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10427

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

DecidedOctober 16, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 276 A.D.2d 597 (Lee v. Sottile) 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

Lee v. Sottile, 276 A.D.2d 597, 714 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10427 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Eun Sook Chung appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated November 12, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default in opposing her motion for summary judgment and, upon reconsideration, denied her motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default in answering, the appellant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.

To establish entitlement to vacatur of a default, a plaintiff must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see, Cooper v P & T Gen. Contr. Corp., 260 AD2d 423; Szilaski v Aphrodite Constr. Co., 247 AD2d 532; Betancourth v Pacheco, 232 AD2d 442). The [598]*598Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default, as they failed to demonstrate the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see, Lopez v Senatore, 65 NY2d 1017, 1019; Smith v Askew, 264 AD2d 834; Gutierrez v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 240 AD2d 469; Antoniou v Duff, 204 AD2d 670). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Florio, 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 defendant Eun Sook Chung appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated November 12, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default in opposing her motion for summary judgment and, upon reconsideration, denied her motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default in answering, the appellant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.

To establish entitlement to vacatur of a default, a plaintiff must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see, Cooper v P & T Gen. Contr. Corp., 260 AD2d 423; Szilaski v Aphrodite Constr. Co., 247 AD2d 532; Betancourth v Pacheco, 232 AD2d 442). The [598]*598Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to vacate their default, as they failed to demonstrate the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see, Lopez v Senatore, 65 NY2d 1017, 1019; Smith v Askew, 264 AD2d 834; Gutierrez v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 240 AD2d 469; Antoniou v Duff, 204 AD2d 670). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 A.D.2d 597, 714 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-sottile-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack