Parker v. Bonitas Youth Services, Inc.

137 A.D.3d 644, 26 N.Y.S.3d 858
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 24, 2016
Docket599N 103629/11
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 137 A.D.3d 644 (Parker v. Bonitas Youth Services, 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
Parker v. Bonitas Youth Services, Inc., 137 A.D.3d 644, 26 N.Y.S.3d 858 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered December 2, 2014, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 317 to vacate a default judgment entered against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant established that “[it] did not personally receive notice of the summons in time to defend and has a meritorious defense” (CPLR 317; see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141-142 [1986]).

Defendant established that it had a meritorious defense to the action by submitting an affidavit by its president and founder outlining in detail the routine safety practices defendant used when operating a sump pump and hose to remove flood water from its basement—thereby doing more than merely “generally vouching for the well-maintained condition of the premises” (Zapater v 2540 Assoc., 250 AD2d 508, 508 *645 [1st Dept 1998]; see Peacock v Kalikow, 239 AD2d 188, 190 [1st Dept 1997]).

Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Saxe and Richter, JJ.

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

Related

Home Care Assoc., Inc. v. Smith
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 A.D.3d 644, 26 N.Y.S.3d 858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-bonitas-youth-services-inc-nyappdiv-2016.