Rivera v. Komor

69 A.D.3d 833, 892 N.Y.2d 769
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 19, 2010·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

A party seeking to vacate an order entered upon his or her default is required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious cause of action or defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Nowell v NYU Med. Ctr., 55 AD3d 573 [2008]; Simpson v Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc., 48 AD3d 389 [2008]). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the Supreme Court’s discretion (see Santiago v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 10 AD3d 393, 394 [2004]; Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568, 569 [1997]). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion to vacate the order dated April 29, 2008, entered upon his default. Santucci, J.P, Angiolillo, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

Rivera v. Komor, 69 A.D.3d 833, 892 N.Y.2d 769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

69 A.D.3d 833 (Rivera v. Komor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McNamara v. McNamara
2016 NY Slip Op 8052 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Capurso v. Capurso
134 A.D.3d 974 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Tsoukas v. Tsoukas
125 A.D.3d 872 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Swensen v. MV Transportation, Inc.
89 A.D.3d 924 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Casali v. Cyran
84 A.D.3d 711 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Lane v. Smith
84 A.D.3d 746 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Lorraine D. v. Widmack C.
79 A.D.3d 745 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)