Umlauf v. County of Chautauqua

105 A.D.2d 1104, 482 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21195
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 7, 1984·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Within two days of its entry, defendant moved to vacate a default judgment taken against it by plaintiff. Defendant concedes that its failure to serve an answer after plaintiff had consented to an extension of time may only be characterized as law office failure. Nevertheless, Special Term was empowered to excuse the default (CPLR 2005). Given the well-established policy favoring dispositions on the merits, the lack of any prejudice to plaintiff, and the possible merit of the defenses which defendant seeks to assert, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in vacating the default judgment (CPLR 5015, subd [a]; Aces Mechanical Corp. v Cohen Bros. Realty & Constr. Corp., 99 AD2d 455). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Ricotta, J. — vacate default judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Green, Moule and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Umlauf v. County of Chautauqua, 105 A.D.2d 1104, 482 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21195 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

105 A.D.2d 1104 (Umlauf v. County of Chautauqua) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goldsmith Motors Corp. v. Chemical Bank
300 A.D.2d 440 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Pickney v. Wood
165 A.D.2d 949 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Vanek v. Mercy Hospital
162 A.D.2d 680 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Sanders v. Sanders
140 A.D.2d 787 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Howlan v. Rosol
139 A.D.2d 799 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)