Melish v. Melish

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Melish v. Melish

267 A.D.2d 218, 699 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12546

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 218 (Melish v. Melish) 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

Melish v. Melish, 267 A.D.2d 218, 699 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12546 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated November 10, 1987, the defendant former husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated January 20, 1998, which denied his motion to vacate a prior order of the same court, dated December 23, 1998, granting the motion of the plaintiff former wife for a transfer to her of his interest in the former marital residence, upon his default in responding to the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On his motion to vacate his default, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious defense to the underlying motion (see, Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568; Fennell v Mason, 204 AD2d 599). The Supreme Court properly denied the motion, as the defendant’s affidavit of merit, which contained only conclusory assertions, was insufficient to establish a meritorious defense to the underlying motion (see, Peterson v Scandurra Trucking Co., 226 AD2d 691; Lener v Club Med, 168 AD2d 433; Starr Block Co. v Tedesco, 146 AD2d 692). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated November 10, 1987, the defendant former husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated January 20, 1998, which denied his motion to vacate a prior order of the same court, dated December 23, 1998, granting the motion of the plaintiff former wife for a transfer to her of his interest in the former marital residence, upon his default in responding to the motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On his motion to vacate his default, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious defense to the underlying motion (see, Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568; Fennell v Mason, 204 AD2d 599). The Supreme Court properly denied the motion, as the defendant’s affidavit of merit, which contained only conclusory assertions, was insufficient to establish a meritorious defense to the underlying motion (see, Peterson v Scandurra Trucking Co., 226 AD2d 691; Lener v Club Med, 168 AD2d 433; Starr Block Co. v Tedesco, 146 AD2d 692). O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 218, 699 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12546, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melish-v-melish-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack