Ricci v. W. T. Grant Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ricci v. W. T. Grant Co.

29 A.D.2d 961, 289 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4291

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

DecidedApril 8, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 961 (Ricci v. W. T. Grant 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

Ricci v. W. T. Grant Co., 29 A.D.2d 961, 289 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4291 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant and third-party plaintiff, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 31, 1967, as (1) on reargument adhered (with an exception, i.e., granting a time extension) to the original decision which, in opening appellant’s default in appearing and answering the complaint, imposed certain conditions and (2) denied appellant relief as to the third-party defendant. Order modified, on the law and the facts, by adding a further exception to the adhering direction, namely, a provision striking out the condition in the original decision (order dated June 14, 1967) requiring •appellant to “ post a bond or other security in the amount of $10,000 to secure any judgment that might be rendered herein against the said defendant, Johnson Security Bureau.” As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. The time within which appellant may comply with the remaining condition (payment of a full bill of taxable costs) is further extended until 20 days after service of a copy of the order entered hereon, with notice of entry. In our opinion, there was no willful default by appellant in failing to appear or answer; and therefore appellant should not have been required to give a bond [962]*962or other security in the amount of $10,000 to secure any judgment that might be rendered herein against it. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant and third-party plaintiff, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 31, 1967, as (1) on reargument adhered (with an exception, i.e., granting a time extension) to the original decision which, in opening appellant’s default in appearing and answering the complaint, imposed certain conditions and (2) denied appellant relief as to the third-party defendant. Order modified, on the law and the facts, by adding a further exception to the adhering direction, namely, a provision striking out the condition in the original decision (order dated June 14, 1967) requiring •appellant to “ post a bond or other security in the amount of $10,000 to secure any judgment that might be rendered herein against the said defendant, Johnson Security Bureau.” As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. The time within which appellant may comply with the remaining condition (payment of a full bill of taxable costs) is further extended until 20 days after service of a copy of the order entered hereon, with notice of entry. In our opinion, there was no willful default by appellant in failing to appear or answer; and therefore appellant should not have been required to give a bond [962]*962or other security in the amount of $10,000 to secure any judgment that might be rendered herein against it. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 961, 289 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricci-v-w-t-grant-co-nyappdiv-1968.