Norberto & Sons, Inc. v. Burman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Norberto & Sons, Inc. v. Burman

160 A.D.2d 787, 555 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187

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

DecidedApril 9, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 160 A.D.2d 787 (Norberto & Sons, Inc. v. Burman) 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

Norberto & Sons, Inc. v. Burman, 160 A.D.2d 787, 555 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal, as limited by their notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), dated September 21, 1988, as conditioned the granting of their motion to vacate a default judgment upon their paying the Sheriff’s poundage fee.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Since the plaintiff’s entry of a default judgment and its issuance of execution to the Sheriff were triggered by the defendants’ failure to timely answer the complaint, we discern no impropriety in the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the defendants were liable for any poundage fees due and owing upon the court’s vacatur of the defendants’ default (see, CPLR 8012 [b] [2]; Red Cheek v Crown Confections, 129 AD2d 787, 788). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Kooper and Balletta, 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 breach of contract, the defendants appeal, as limited by their notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), dated September 21, 1988, as conditioned the granting of their motion to vacate a default judgment upon their paying the Sheriff’s poundage fee.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Since the plaintiff’s entry of a default judgment and its issuance of execution to the Sheriff were triggered by the defendants’ failure to timely answer the complaint, we discern no impropriety in the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the defendants were liable for any poundage fees due and owing upon the court’s vacatur of the defendants’ default (see, CPLR 8012 [b] [2]; Red Cheek v Crown Confections, 129 AD2d 787, 788). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 A.D.2d 787, 555 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norberto-sons-inc-v-burman-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack