Newton v. Nutty Irishman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Newton v. Nutty Irishman

38 A.D.3d 630, 831 N.Y.S.2d 509

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

DecidedMarch 13, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.3d 630 (Newton v. Nutty Irishman) 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

Newton v. Nutty Irishman, 38 A.D.3d 630, 831 N.Y.S.2d 509 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), dated April 6, 2006, which granted the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter a default judgment against it upon its failure to answer the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To successfully oppose the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter a default judgment against it based on its failure to answer, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its default and a meritorious defense (see Platinum RX, LLC v Pose, 31 AD3d 522 [2006]; Thompson v Steuben Realty Corp., 18 AD3d 864, 864-865 [2005]). The defendant failed to present a reasonable excuse for its delay in answering after its insurance company disclaimed coverage by letter dated October 4, 2005 (see Thompson v Steuben Realty Corp., supra at 865). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion. Crane, J.P, Santucci, Florio, Dillon and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), dated April 6, 2006, which granted the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter a default judgment against it upon its failure to answer the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To successfully oppose the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter a default judgment against it based on its failure to answer, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its default and a meritorious defense (see Platinum RX, LLC v Pose, 31 AD3d 522 [2006]; Thompson v Steuben Realty Corp., 18 AD3d 864, 864-865 [2005]). The defendant failed to present a reasonable excuse for its delay in answering after its insurance company disclaimed coverage by letter dated October 4, 2005 (see Thompson v Steuben Realty Corp., supra at 865). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion. Crane, J.P, Santucci, Florio, Dillon and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 630, 831 N.Y.S.2d 509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newton-v-nutty-irishman-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack