Zeballos v. Zeballos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zeballos v. Zeballos

104 A.D.2d 1033, 481 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20469

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 104 A.D.2d 1033 (Zeballos v. Zeballos) 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

Zeballos v. Zeballos, 104 A.D.2d 1033, 481 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20469 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to foreclose a mortgage, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.), entered July 14, 1983, which denied that branch of his motion as sought to vacate a default judgment and [1034]*1034so much of that motion as purportedly sought dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3215 (subd [c]) for failure to prosecute.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Based on the record submitted, the issue concerning plaintiff’s allegedly untimely pursuit of a default judgment was not raised in defendant’s motion papers to vacate the default and, therefore, may not be considered for the first time on appeal (Brent-Grand v Megavolt Corp., 97 AD2d 783; Arnold v New City Condominiums Corp., 88 AD2d 578, 579). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to foreclose a mortgage, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.), entered July 14, 1983, which denied that branch of his motion as sought to vacate a default judgment and [1034]*1034so much of that motion as purportedly sought dismissal of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3215 (subd [c]) for failure to prosecute.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Based on the record submitted, the issue concerning plaintiff’s allegedly untimely pursuit of a default judgment was not raised in defendant’s motion papers to vacate the default and, therefore, may not be considered for the first time on appeal (Brent-Grand v Megavolt Corp., 97 AD2d 783; Arnold v New City Condominiums Corp., 88 AD2d 578, 579). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 1033, 481 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeballos-v-zeballos-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack