Niagara Precision, Inc. v. Jaybrake Enterprises, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Niagara Precision, Inc. v. Jaybrake Enterprises, Inc.

272 A.D.2d 954, 708 N.Y.S.2d 690, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8739

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

DecidedMay 10, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 954 (Niagara Precision, Inc. v. Jaybrake Enterprises, 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

Niagara Precision, Inc. v. Jaybrake Enterprises, Inc., 272 A.D.2d 954, 708 N.Y.S.2d 690, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8739 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and judgment and restraining notices reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in vacating the judgment entered by plaintiff and the restraining notices served with respect to the judgment. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the only condition precedent to the filing of the judgment was defendant’s default in payment. It is undisputed that defendant failed to make a payment by [955]*955the first of the month or within five days after receiving written notice of the default, and thus plaintiff was authorized under the terms of the confession of judgment to enter judgment against defendant for the amount due plaintiff. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Joslin, J.— Vacate Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and judgment and restraining notices reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in vacating the judgment entered by plaintiff and the restraining notices served with respect to the judgment. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the only condition precedent to the filing of the judgment was defendant’s default in payment. It is undisputed that defendant failed to make a payment by [955]*955the first of the month or within five days after receiving written notice of the default, and thus plaintiff was authorized under the terms of the confession of judgment to enter judgment against defendant for the amount due plaintiff. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Joslin, J.— Vacate Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 954, 708 N.Y.S.2d 690, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/niagara-precision-inc-v-jaybrake-enterprises-inc-nyappdiv-2000.