From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cotag S.A.R.L. v. Khalifa

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 15, 2015
124 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

01-15-2015

COTAG S.A.R.L., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Karim Ben KHALIFA, Defendant–Appellant.

Karim Ben Khalifa, appellant pro se. Lewis S. Fischbein, P.C., New York (Lewis S. Fischbein of counsel), for respondent.


Karim Ben Khalifa, appellant pro se.

Lewis S. Fischbein, P.C., New York (Lewis S. Fischbein of counsel), for respondent.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., SWEENY, ANDRIAS, MOSKOWITZ, RICHTER, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered April 18, 2013, awarding plaintiff the total amount of $476,119.57, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered March 15, 2013, which denied defendant Karim Ben Khalifa's (defendant) motion to vacate his default, adopted the report of the special referee, and directed the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in plaintiff's favor against defendants, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

Defendant contends that his default should have been vacated because he was not properly served with the summons and complaint. However, he completely fails to address the August 6, 2012 order which—as a result of his failure to comply with a June 12, 2012 discovery order—deemed his address as of the date of service to be a specific address in Manhattan. Under those circumstances, service on the concierge at that address was proper (see generally Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman v. New York Turkey Corp., 111 A.D.2d 93, 489 N.Y.S.2d 226 [1st Dept.1985] ).

The special referee's findings were supported by the record; hence, the IAS court properly confirmed the special referee's report (see generally Freedman v. Freedman, 211 A.D.2d 580, 621 N.Y.S.2d 610 [1st Dept.1995] ).

Defendant's remaining arguments (e.g., that the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3211[a][1] and [7 ], when defendants never made such a motion below) are not properly before us on this appeal, or improperly rely on "documents dehors the record" ( Sunrise Capital Partners Mgt. LLC v. Glattstein, 115 A.D.3d 602, 602, 982 N.Y.S.2d 321 [1st Dept.2014] ).


Summaries of

Cotag S.A.R.L. v. Khalifa

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 15, 2015
124 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Cotag S.A.R.L. v. Khalifa

Case Details

Full title:Cotag S.A.R.L., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Karim Ben Khalifa…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 15, 2015

Citations

124 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
124 A.D.3d 465
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 447

Citing Cases

Vista Eng'g Corp. v. Everest Indem. Ins. Co.

Everest has failed to establish a sufficient showing of merit (cf.MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Greystone & Co., Inc.,…

Obstfeld v. Thermo Niton Analyzers, LLC

Rather, the plaintiffs' motion to conform the pleadings to the proof was directed to other matters, including…