Merchants Insurance Group v. Coutrier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Merchants Insurance Group v. Coutrier

120 A.D.3d 776, 991 N.Y.S.2d 370

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

DecidedAugust 27, 2014

Docket2013-02493

StatusPublished

This text of 120 A.D.3d 776 (Merchants Insurance Group v. Coutrier) 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

Merchants Insurance Group v. Coutrier, 120 A.D.3d 776, 991 N.Y.S.2d 370 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In a subrogation action to recover benefits paid to the plaintiffs insured, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated December 18, 2012, which granted the defendant’s motion, in effect, to amend an order of the same court dated February 1, 2008, vacating a default judgment against the defendant, so as to direct the return of his wages garnished in connection with the default judgment.

Ordered that the order dated December 18, 2012, is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the plaintiffs retention of the defendant’s wages garnished in connection with a default judgment against the defendant and in the plaintiffs favor is inconsistent with the vacatur of the default judgment. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion.

Mastro, J.E, Dillon, Miller and Maltese, JJ., concur.

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

In a subrogation action to recover benefits paid to the plaintiffs insured, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated December 18, 2012, which granted the defendant’s motion, in effect, to amend an order of the same court dated February 1, 2008, vacating a default judgment against the defendant, so as to direct the return of his wages garnished in connection with the default judgment.

Ordered that the order dated December 18, 2012, is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the plaintiffs retention of the defendant’s wages garnished in connection with a default judgment against the defendant and in the plaintiffs favor is inconsistent with the vacatur of the default judgment. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion.

Mastro, J.E, Dillon, Miller and Maltese, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 A.D.3d 776, 991 N.Y.S.2d 370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merchants-insurance-group-v-coutrier-nyappdiv-2014.