Yearwood v. Post Park, LLC

91 A.D.3d 766, 936 N.Y.2d 893
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 17, 2012·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

[767]*767A motion to vacate an order based on excusable default requires the movant to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a potentially meritorious claim or defense (see Alberton Devs., Inc. v All Trade Enters., Inc., 74 AD3d 1000 [2010]; White v Incorporated Vil. of Hempstead, 41 AD3d 709, 710 [2007]; Lee v Arellano, 18 AD 3d 620 [2005]; Kumar v Yonkers Contr. Co., Inc., 14 AD3d 493, 494 [2005]; Reices v Catholic Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens, 306 AD2d 394 [2003]).

Under the circumstances here, the plaintiff offered a reasonable excuse for his default and demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious claim (see White v Incorporated Vil. of Hempstead, 41 AD3d at 710; Reices v Catholic Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens, 306 AD2d 394 [2003]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the plaintiffs motion to vacate the order entered July 9, 2010. Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Leventhal and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

Yearwood v. Post Park, LLC, 91 A.D.3d 766, 936 N.Y.2d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

91 A.D.3d 766 (Yearwood v. Post Park, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Polsky v. Simon
2016 NY Slip Op 8213 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Thomas v. Avalon Gardens Rehabilitation & Health Care Center
107 A.D.3d 694 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)