Merlite Industries, Inc. v. Maddalena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Merlite Industries, Inc. v. Maddalena

248 A.D.2d 117, 669 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1929

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 3, 1998·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered September 3, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by [118]*118defendants’ brief, granted plaintiffs cross motion for sanctions and directed defendants’ counsel to pay $500 in costs and attorneys’ fees as a condition to opening defendants’ default, and to pay an additional $500 in sanctions to the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We find that the motion court properly exercised its discretion in awarding a $500 sanction against defendants’ counsel under the circumstances (see, 22 NYCKR 130-1.1 et seq.). The imposition of costs and attorneys’ fees of $500 payable to plaintiffs attorneys was a condition to the vacatur of defendants’ default and was clearly warranted (see, Gordineer v Gallagher, 160 AD2d 672; CPLR 2005, 3012 [d]; 5015 [a]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered September 3, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by [118]*118defendants’ brief, granted plaintiffs cross motion for sanctions and directed defendants’ counsel to pay $500 in costs and attorneys’ fees as a condition to opening defendants’ default, and to pay an additional $500 in sanctions to the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We find that the motion court properly exercised its discretion in awarding a $500 sanction against defendants’ counsel under the circumstances (see, 22 NYCKR 130-1.1 et seq.). The imposition of costs and attorneys’ fees of $500 payable to plaintiffs attorneys was a condition to the vacatur of defendants’ default and was clearly warranted (see, Gordineer v Gallagher, 160 AD2d 672; CPLR 2005, 3012 [d]; 5015 [a]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Tom, JJ.

Merlite Industries, Inc. v. Maddalena, 248 A.D.2d 117, 669 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1929 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

248 A.D.2d 117 (Merlite Industries, Inc. v. Maddalena) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related