OCE Business Systems, Inc. v. J.I. Sopher & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

OCE Business Systems, Inc. v. J.I. Sopher & Co.

186 A.D.2d 464, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12165

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 186 A.D.2d 464 (OCE Business Systems, Inc. v. J.I. Sopher & Co.) 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

OCE Business Systems, Inc. v. J.I. Sopher & Co., 186 A.D.2d 464, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.) entered March 24, 1992, in favor of plaintiff in the total sum of $79,962.56, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Judgment was entered after denial of defendant’s motion to vacate an order granting, on defendant’s default, plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s pleadings. Defendant had previously defaulted on repeated requests for answers to interrogatories. Defendant made clear that its prior counsel had intentionally defaulted on the motion to strike because he believed that his client did not have a tenable position after failing to provide the information needed for the interrogatory answers.

The IAS Court correctly determined that, regardless of the merits of the defense, there was no reasonable excuse for the default (see, Dimitratos v City of New York, 180 AD2d 414). There is a difference between law office failure and misguided strategy (see, King v Tanner, 144 Misc 2d 1073, 1076), and this seems to be a case of the latter. Concur — Wallach, J. P., Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.) entered March 24, 1992, in favor of plaintiff in the total sum of $79,962.56, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Judgment was entered after denial of defendant’s motion to vacate an order granting, on defendant’s default, plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s pleadings. Defendant had previously defaulted on repeated requests for answers to interrogatories. Defendant made clear that its prior counsel had intentionally defaulted on the motion to strike because he believed that his client did not have a tenable position after failing to provide the information needed for the interrogatory answers.

The IAS Court correctly determined that, regardless of the merits of the defense, there was no reasonable excuse for the default (see, Dimitratos v City of New York, 180 AD2d 414). There is a difference between law office failure and misguided strategy (see, King v Tanner, 144 Misc 2d 1073, 1076), and this seems to be a case of the latter. Concur — Wallach, J. P., Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 464, 589 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oce-business-systems-inc-v-ji-sopher-co-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack