Oliphant v. Oliphant

21 A.D.3d 376, 798 N.Y.S.2d 914
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 1, 2005·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Horowitz, J.), dated December 9, 2003, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Kava, H.E.), entered June 10, 2003, denying his motion to vacate an order of the same court (Kava, H.E.), dated February 5, 2003, awarding child support after an inquest.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A party attempting to vacate a default judgment must establish both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see Zherka v Zherka, 17 AD3d 668 [2005]; Rolston v Rolston, 261 AD2d 377 [1999]). The father failed to satisfy that standard in this case. Adams, J.P., Krausman, Spolzino and Fisher, JJ., concur.

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

Oliphant v. Oliphant, 21 A.D.3d 376, 798 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

21 A.D.3d 376 (Oliphant v. Oliphant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hurston v. Southlea
91 A.D.3d 952 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Johnson v. Lee
89 A.D.3d 733 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Lee v. Morgan
67 A.D.3d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Joosten v. Joosten
32 A.D.3d 1030 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Dellagatta v. McGillicuddy
31 A.D.3d 549 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)