Volin v. City Beach Catering Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Volin v. City Beach Catering Corp.

166 A.D.2d 583, 560 N.Y.S.2d 869, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12709

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 166 A.D.2d 583 (Volin v. City Beach Catering Corp.) 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

Volin v. City Beach Catering Corp., 166 A.D.2d 583, 560 N.Y.S.2d 869, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12709 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz, J.), dated August 17, 1988, as, upon reargument, adhered to its prior order, dated May 27, 1988, denying his motion for leave to enter a default judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

[584]*584Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, we find that the court properly denied his motion for leave to enter a default judgment (see, CPLR 3215 [a]). While the record is inconclusive as to whether a formal stipulation extending the defendant’s time to answer was ever executed, it is clear that such a stipulation was made, and that the parties relied upon it (see, La Marque v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 120 AD2d 572). Moreover, the plaintiff waived any claim that the defendant had defaulted by accepting the defendant’s answer, and by accepting and responding to the defendant’s discovery demands. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz, J.), dated August 17, 1988, as, upon reargument, adhered to its prior order, dated May 27, 1988, denying his motion for leave to enter a default judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

[584]*584Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, we find that the court properly denied his motion for leave to enter a default judgment (see, CPLR 3215 [a]). While the record is inconclusive as to whether a formal stipulation extending the defendant’s time to answer was ever executed, it is clear that such a stipulation was made, and that the parties relied upon it (see, La Marque v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 120 AD2d 572). Moreover, the plaintiff waived any claim that the defendant had defaulted by accepting the defendant’s answer, and by accepting and responding to the defendant’s discovery demands. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 A.D.2d 583, 560 N.Y.S.2d 869, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/volin-v-city-beach-catering-corp-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack