Stein v. DKA Restaurant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stein v. DKA Restaurant

297 A.D.2d 563, 747 N.Y.2d 157, 747 N.Y.S.2d 157, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8444

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 19, 2002·Published

Opinion

The motion was properly denied upon a showing of a meritorious defense, and defendant’s attorney’s affirmation that he first received the summons and complaint along with the instant motion for a default judgment. Defendant’s attorney received the motion for a default only two months after plaintiffs service of process on the Secretary of State pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 306, and one month after plaintiffs service of the instant motion on defendant. There is no indication that plaintiff was prejudiced by this short delay (see Higgins v Bellet Constr. Co., 287 AD2d 377). Concur— Wallach, J.P., Lerner, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

The motion was properly denied upon a showing of a meritorious defense, and defendant’s attorney’s affirmation that he first received the summons and complaint along with the instant motion for a default judgment. Defendant’s attorney received the motion for a default only two months after plaintiffs service of process on the Secretary of State pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 306, and one month after plaintiffs service of the instant motion on defendant. There is no indication that plaintiff was prejudiced by this short delay (see Higgins v Bellet Constr. Co., 287 AD2d 377). Concur— Wallach, J.P., Lerner, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Stein v. DKA Restaurant, 297 A.D.2d 563, 747 N.Y.2d 157, 747 N.Y.S.2d 157, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

297 A.D.2d 563 (Stein v. DKA Restaurant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related