Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp. v. Electrograph Technologies Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp. v. Electrograph Technologies Corp.

91 A.D.3d 920, 937 N.Y.2d 598

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 31, 2012·Published

Opinion

The defendant failed to demonstrate that it had a potentially meritorious defense to the action on the issue of liability for breach of the commercial lease (see generally Holy Props. v Cole Prods., 87 NY2d 130, 133-134 [1995]; Riverside Research Inst. v KMGA, Inc., 68 NY2d 689, 691-692 [1986]; REP A8 LLC v Aventura Tech., Inc., 68 AD3d 1087, 1089 [2009]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment. Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant failed to demonstrate that it had a potentially meritorious defense to the action on the issue of liability for breach of the commercial lease (see generally Holy Props. v Cole Prods., 87 NY2d 130, 133-134 [1995]; Riverside Research Inst. v KMGA, Inc., 68 NY2d 689, 691-692 [1986]; REP A8 LLC v Aventura Tech., Inc., 68 AD3d 1087, 1089 [2009]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment. Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.

Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp. v. Electrograph Technologies Corp., 91 A.D.3d 920, 937 N.Y.2d 598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

91 A.D.3d 920 (Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply Corp. v. Electrograph Technologies Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related