Rottenberg v. Lerner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rottenberg v. Lerner

232 A.D.2d 395, 648 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9892

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 395 (Rottenberg v. Lerner) 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

Rottenberg v. Lerner, 232 A.D.2d 395, 648 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated August 28, 1995, which denied their motion to vacate a judgment entered upon their default in answering.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The court did not improvidently deny the defendants’ motion to vacate the default judgment entered against them. The defendants’ contention that they were unable to afford counsel is not a reasonable excuse for their default (Moore v Claudio, 224 AD2d 502; see, People v Scudds, 195 AD2d 778, 779; City of New York v Simmonds, 172 AD2d 1081). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated August 28, 1995, which denied their motion to vacate a judgment entered upon their default in answering.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The court did not improvidently deny the defendants’ motion to vacate the default judgment entered against them. The defendants’ contention that they were unable to afford counsel is not a reasonable excuse for their default (Moore v Claudio, 224 AD2d 502; see, People v Scudds, 195 AD2d 778, 779; City of New York v Simmonds, 172 AD2d 1081). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 395, 648 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rottenberg-v-lerner-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack