Rosman & Co. v. Chideckel
This text of Rosman & Co. v. Chideckel (Rosman & Co. v. Chideckel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
against
David Chideckel, Appellant.
David Chideckel, appellant pro se. Maidenbaum & Associates, P.L.L.C. (Jeffrey A. Maidenbaum, Esq.), for respondent.
Appeal from an order of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Ignatius L. Muscarella, J.), dated March 30, 2015. The order denied defendant's motion to vacate a default judgment of the same court entered May 8, 2014 upon defendant's failure to appear at trial.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.
In this action to recover for unpaid accounting services, defendant appeals from an order denying his motion to vacate a judgment, entered May 8, 2014 upon defendant's failure to appear at trial, which awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $5,470.
In support of his motion, defendant failed to set forth either a reasonable excuse or a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a]). To the extent that defendant is attempting to raise an issue as to the entry of the default judgment, defendant has failed to demonstrate that the judgment was not properly entered pursuant to CPLR 3215 (f). Defendant has also failed to establish any other basis to vacate the default judgment.
Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
Tolbert, J.P., Garguilo and Brands, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: June 01, 2017
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rosman & Co. v. Chideckel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosman-co-v-chideckel-nyappterm-2017.