Meyer v. Parr Co. of Suffolk, Inc.

50 A.D.2d 927, 377 N.Y.S.2d 612, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12176
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 31, 1975·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— In two actions to foreclose separate mortgages on real property, in each of which an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, was made appointing a referee to compute the amount due plaintiffs, upon defendants’ default in answering, defendants the Parr Company of Suffolk, Inc., and Suffolk Meadows Enterprises, Inc., appeal from separate orders (one in each action) of the same court, both entered October 2, 1975, which, inter alia, denied their respective motions to open their defaults. Orders affirmed, without costs. In our view, appellants failed to meet their burden of establishing excusable neglect and the existence of a meritorious defense. Consequently, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the [928] motions. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Meyer v. Parr Co. of Suffolk, Inc., 50 A.D.2d 927, 377 N.Y.S.2d 612, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12176 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

50 A.D.2d 927 (Meyer v. Parr Co. of Suffolk, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Berlin v. New Hope Holiness Church of God, Inc.
93 A.D.2d 798 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Vogel v. Asgrow Mandeville Co.
74 A.D.2d 940 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)