Mill Valley Celebrity Homes, Ltd. v. Empbanque Capital Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mill Valley Celebrity Homes, Ltd. v. Empbanque Capital Corp.

178 A.D.2d 949

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

DecidedDecember 26, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 178 A.D.2d 949 (Mill Valley Celebrity Homes, Ltd. v. Empbanque Capital Corp.) 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

Mill Valley Celebrity Homes, Ltd. v. Empbanque Capital Corp., 178 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in vacating the New York filing of its Ohio judgment against defendants. The record establishes that the Ohio judgment was taken by default. Defendants neither answered plaintiff’s complaint nor moved against it in the Ohio action. Further, plaintiff concedes that defendants’ filing of two stipulations to extend the time to answer in the Ohio action did not constitute an appearance under CPLR 320 (a). Because judgment was taken in Ohio by "default in appearance”, the trial court properly found that plaintiff was not authorized to register the foreign judgment in New York [950]*950(CPLR 5401). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gorski, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Doerr, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in vacating the New York filing of its Ohio judgment against defendants. The record establishes that the Ohio judgment was taken by default. Defendants neither answered plaintiff’s complaint nor moved against it in the Ohio action. Further, plaintiff concedes that defendants’ filing of two stipulations to extend the time to answer in the Ohio action did not constitute an appearance under CPLR 320 (a). Because judgment was taken in Ohio by "default in appearance”, the trial court properly found that plaintiff was not authorized to register the foreign judgment in New York [950]*950(CPLR 5401). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gorski, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Doerr, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 A.D.2d 949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mill-valley-celebrity-homes-ltd-v-empbanque-capital-corp-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack