Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. v. Jackson

2017 NY Slip Op 1991, 148 A.D.3d 548, 48 N.Y.S.3d 897

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2017

Docket3442 110621/07

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 1991 (Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. v. Jackson) 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

Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. v. Jackson, 2017 NY Slip Op 1991, 148 A.D.3d 548, 48 N.Y.S.3d 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered April 21, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew defendant Vincent Jackson’s prior motion to vacate the default judgment against him, or, alternatively, for vacatur of three of the court’s prior orders, which, among other things, vacated the default judgment, granted a traverse hearing, and dismissed the case, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court properly denied the motion for leave to renew, because plaintiff failed to offer new facts that would change the court’s prior determination (CPLR 2221 [e] [2]). Nor was vacatur of the court’s prior orders warranted under CPLR 5015 (a).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels, Webber and Gesmer, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered April 21, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew defendant Vincent Jackson’s prior motion to vacate the default judgment against him, or, alternatively, for vacatur of three of the court’s prior orders, which, among other things, vacated the default judgment, granted a traverse hearing, and dismissed the case, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court properly denied the motion for leave to renew, because plaintiff failed to offer new facts that would change the court’s prior determination (CPLR 2221 [e] [2]). Nor was vacatur of the court’s prior orders warranted under CPLR 5015 (a).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels, Webber and Gesmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 1991, 148 A.D.3d 548, 48 N.Y.S.3d 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-mutual-mortgage-securities-corp-v-jackson-nyappdiv-2017.