Mucci v. Preferred Construction, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mucci v. Preferred Construction, Inc.

284 A.D.2d 512, 727 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6828

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

DecidedJune 25, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 512 (Mucci v. Preferred Construction, Inc.) 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

Mucci v. Preferred Construction, Inc., 284 A.D.2d 512, 727 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6828 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated November 15, 2000, as granted the defendants’ motion to vacate their default in appearing and answering.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in granting the defendants’ motion to vacate their default, as they demonstrated neither a reasonable excuse for their default nor a meritorious defense to the action (see, Cooper v P & T Gen. Contr. Corp., 260 AD2d 423; Domenikos v Miranda, 255 AD2d 481; Szilaski v Aphrodite Constr. Co., 247 AD2d 532; Betancourth v Pacheco, 232 AD2d 442).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated November 15, 2000, as granted the defendants’ motion to vacate their default in appearing and answering.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in granting the defendants’ motion to vacate their default, as they demonstrated neither a reasonable excuse for their default nor a meritorious defense to the action (see, Cooper v P & T Gen. Contr. Corp., 260 AD2d 423; Domenikos v Miranda, 255 AD2d 481; Szilaski v Aphrodite Constr. Co., 247 AD2d 532; Betancourth v Pacheco, 232 AD2d 442).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 512, 727 N.Y.S.2d 631, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mucci-v-preferred-construction-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack