Rossini Excavating Corp. v. Shelter Rock Builders, LLC
89 A.D.3d 467, 931 N.Y.2d 874
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 3, 2011·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
There was no default in answering. Plaintiff waived its objections to the untimeliness of defendants’ answer by serving a reply to the counterclaims after rejecting the late answer and moving for a default judgment (cf. Oparaji v Duran, 18 AD3d 725 [2005]). In view of the foregoing, whether defendant demonstrated the grounds required for vacatur of a default and the other issues arising from the subsequent chain of events are academic. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Saxe, Acosta, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rossini Excavating Corp. v. Shelter Rock Builders, LLC, 89 A.D.3d 467, 931 N.Y.2d 874 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
89 A.D.3d 467 (Rossini Excavating Corp. v. Shelter Rock Builders, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bhugra v. Massachusetts Casualty Insurance
105 A.D.3d 685 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)