Okeke v. Ewool

66 A.D.3d 978, 886 N.Y.S.2d 817
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 27, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 66 A.D.3d 978 (Okeke v. Ewool) 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
Okeke v. Ewool, 66 A.D.3d 978, 886 N.Y.S.2d 817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for unlawful eviction, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (McMahon, J.), dated September 23, 2008, [979]*979which denied his unopposed motion pursuant to CPLR 3215 for leave to enter judgment against the defendants on the issue of liability upon their defaults in appearing or answering the complaint and to set the matter down for an inquest on the issue of damages.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs payable by the defendants, and the plaintiffs motion for leave to enter judgment against the defendants on the issue of liability upon their defaults in appearing or answering the complaint and to set the matter down for an inquest on the issue of damages is granted.

In support of his unopposed motion pursuant to CPLR 3215, the plaintiff submitted proof of service of copies of the summons and the complaint upon the defendants, of the facts constituting the claim, and of the defendants’ defaults in appearing or answering the complaint (see CPLR 3215 [f]; Levine v Forgotson’s Cent. Auto & Elec., Inc., 41 AD3d 552, 553 [2007]; 599 Ralph Ave. Dev., LLC v 799 Sterling Inc., 34 AD3d 726 [2006]; Lipp v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 34 AD3d 649 [2006]). There is no evidence in the record that the defendants made timely appearances or answered the complaint. Accordingly, the plaintiffs unopposed motion for leave to enter judgment against the defendants on the issue of liability upon their defaults in appearing or answering the complaint and to set the matter down for an inquest on the issue of damages should have been granted. Rivera, J.E, Miller, Balkin, Leventhal and Hall, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Okeke v. Ewool
106 A.D.3d 709 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
LIUS Group International Endwell, LLC v. HFS International, Inc.
92 A.D.3d 918 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Pursoo v. Ngala-El
89 A.D.3d 712 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Church of South India Malayalam Congregation v. Bryant Installations, Inc.
85 A.D.3d 706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Goonan v. New York City Transit Authority
74 A.D.3d 747 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 A.D.3d 978, 886 N.Y.S.2d 817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/okeke-v-ewool-nyappdiv-2009.