Mayrhauser v. Reda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mayrhauser v. Reda

115 A.D.2d 459, 496 N.Y.S.2d 357, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54839

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

DecidedDecember 2, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A.D.2d 459 (Mayrhauser v. Reda) 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

Mayrhauser v. Reda, 115 A.D.2d 459, 496 N.Y.S.2d 357, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a declaratory judgment action, inter alia, seeking resolution of a boundary dispute between adjoining landowners, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Ferraro, J.), dated September 21, 1984, which granted Antonio and Vera Reda’s motion to vacate a default judgment which had been entered against them on condition that respondents’ counsel pay plaintiffs $50.

Order modified, by increasing the penalty imposed on counsel for respondents to $250. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Counsel’s time to pay the $250, less any amounts already paid, is extended until 30 days after service upon him of a copy of the order to be made hereon with notice of entry.

Under the circumstances of this case, respondents should be permitted to serve an answer and receive a determination on the merits as to the underlying conflict concerning the correct boundary lines of their property. However, we find that the sanction imposed was inadequate to the extent indicated. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

In a declaratory judgment action, inter alia, seeking resolution of a boundary dispute between adjoining landowners, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Ferraro, J.), dated September 21, 1984, which granted Antonio and Vera Reda’s motion to vacate a default judgment which had been entered against them on condition that respondents’ counsel pay plaintiffs $50.

Order modified, by increasing the penalty imposed on counsel for respondents to $250. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Counsel’s time to pay the $250, less any amounts already paid, is extended until 30 days after service upon him of a copy of the order to be made hereon with notice of entry.

Under the circumstances of this case, respondents should be permitted to serve an answer and receive a determination on the merits as to the underlying conflict concerning the correct boundary lines of their property. However, we find that the sanction imposed was inadequate to the extent indicated. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 459, 496 N.Y.S.2d 357, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayrhauser-v-reda-nyappdiv-1985.