Roland v. White

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roland v. White

227 A.D.2d 395, 642 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4875

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

DecidedMay 6, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D.2d 395 (Roland v. White) 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

Roland v. White, 227 A.D.2d 395, 642 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4875 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution, libel, and slander, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Miller, J.), dated January 22, 1996, which granted the defendant’s motion to vacate an order of the same court dated August 5, 1994, granting the plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment.

[396]*396Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established that she had timely served her answer to the plaintiffs complaint. Thus, the court properly granted the defendant’s motion to vacate the order granting the plaintiffs motion for a default judgment. The plaintiffs mere denial of receipt of the answer failed to rebut the presumption of proper mailing (see, Morgan v Long Beach Entertainment Complex, 125 AD2d 378; Engel v Lichterman, 62 NY2d 943). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution, libel, and slander, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Miller, J.), dated January 22, 1996, which granted the defendant’s motion to vacate an order of the same court dated August 5, 1994, granting the plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment.

[396]*396Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established that she had timely served her answer to the plaintiffs complaint. Thus, the court properly granted the defendant’s motion to vacate the order granting the plaintiffs motion for a default judgment. The plaintiffs mere denial of receipt of the answer failed to rebut the presumption of proper mailing (see, Morgan v Long Beach Entertainment Complex, 125 AD2d 378; Engel v Lichterman, 62 NY2d 943). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 395, 642 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roland-v-white-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack