Magidson v. New York Testing Laboratories, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Magidson v. New York Testing Laboratories, Inc.

303 A.D.2d 651, 756 N.Y.S.2d 790

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

DecidedMarch 24, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 651 (Magidson v. New York Testing Laboratories, Inc.) 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

Magidson v. New York Testing Laboratories, Inc., 303 A.D.2d 651, 756 N.Y.S.2d 790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated April 3, 2001, which denied her motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated January 21, 2000, granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and CPLR 306-b, upon her default in responding to the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In order to vacate the order dated January 21, 2000, which granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and CPLR 306-b upon her default in responding to the motion, the plaintiff had to proffer evidence of a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see McNeil v Milstein, 240 AD2d 549, 550 [1997]). The plaintiff failed to satisfy this standard. Altman, J.P., Smith, Luciano, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated April 3, 2001, which denied her motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated January 21, 2000, granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and CPLR 306-b, upon her default in responding to the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In order to vacate the order dated January 21, 2000, which granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) and CPLR 306-b upon her default in responding to the motion, the plaintiff had to proffer evidence of a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see McNeil v Milstein, 240 AD2d 549, 550 [1997]). The plaintiff failed to satisfy this standard. Altman, J.P., Smith, Luciano, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 651, 756 N.Y.S.2d 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/magidson-v-new-york-testing-laboratories-inc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack