Polytemp, Inc. v. Sell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Polytemp, Inc. v. Sell

59 A.D.2d 938, 399 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14175

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

DecidedNovember 28, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 59 A.D.2d 938 (Polytemp, Inc. v. Sell) 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

Polytemp, Inc. v. Sell, 59 A.D.2d 938, 399 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14175 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action on a contract, defendant appeals (by permission) from so much of an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts, dated October 6, 1976, as affirmed an order of the County Court, Westchester County, dated February 25, 1974, which denied a motion by defendant to vacate a default judgment entered in the County Court on December 3,1973. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and motion to open default granted, on condition that defendant pay the amount of $200 to the plaintiff within 20 days after service upon defendant of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof; in the event such condition is not complied with, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Defendant-appellant’s [939]*939papers show that he may have a meritorious defense to plaintiff’s action. He also correctly asserts that the County Court should have granted his motion for an order directing plaintiff to appoint a single attorney of record (see Matter of Kitsch v Riker Oil Co., 23 AD2d 502). However, in granting defendant’s motion in the interest of justice, this court does not condone his refusal to proceed with this case after a jury was chosen and, for that reason, has imposed a penalty upon him (see Sotcheff v French, 59 AD2d 777). Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Shapiro and Mollen, JJ., concur.

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

In an action on a contract, defendant appeals (by permission) from so much of an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts, dated October 6, 1976, as affirmed an order of the County Court, Westchester County, dated February 25, 1974, which denied a motion by defendant to vacate a default judgment entered in the County Court on December 3,1973. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and motion to open default granted, on condition that defendant pay the amount of $200 to the plaintiff within 20 days after service upon defendant of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof; in the event such condition is not complied with, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Defendant-appellant’s [939]*939papers show that he may have a meritorious defense to plaintiff’s action. He also correctly asserts that the County Court should have granted his motion for an order directing plaintiff to appoint a single attorney of record (see Matter of Kitsch v Riker Oil Co., 23 AD2d 502). However, in granting defendant’s motion in the interest of justice, this court does not condone his refusal to proceed with this case after a jury was chosen and, for that reason, has imposed a penalty upon him (see Sotcheff v French, 59 AD2d 777). Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Shapiro and Mollen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 938, 399 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polytemp-inc-v-sell-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack