From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nursing Homecare v. N.Y. Cent. Mt. Fire

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 10, 2010
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 50450 (N.Y. App. Term 2010)

Opinion

2009-290 K C.

Decided March 10, 2010.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Robin D. Garson, J.), entered December 18, 2008. The order denied defendant's motion to vacate a default judgment.

ORDERED that the order is reversed without costs and defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment is granted.

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., WESTON and STEINHARDT, JJ.


In this action to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied its motion to vacate a default judgment.

In order to vacate a default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), a defendant is required to establish both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense ( see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141; Putney v Pearlman, 203 AD2d 333). A motion to vacate a default judgment is addressed to the sound discretion of the motion court ( see Matter of Gambardella v Ortov Light., 278 AD2d 494), and its determination will generally not be disturbed unless it can be shown that the court improvidently exercised its discretion ( see Levy Williams Constr. Corp. v United States Fire Ins. Co., 280 AD2d 650).

Plaintiff's affidavit of service established that plaintiff had effectuated service upon defendant through the delivery of the summons and complaint to the Superintendent of Insurance ( see Insurance Law § 1212; Hospital for Joint Diseases v Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co., 55 AD3d 543; New York Presbyt. Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 29 AD3d 968; Kaperonis v Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 254 AD2d 334; see also CPLR 311 [a] [1]). In support of defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment, there was more than a "mere denial" of receipt of the summons and complaint ( see Montefiore Med. Ctr. v Auto One Ins. Co., 57 AD3d 958, 959). Defendant submitted an affidavit from one of its no-fault litigation examiners, who had personal knowledge regarding defendant's practices and procedures in retrieving, opening and filing its mail and in maintaining its files on existing claims. In said affidavit, the no-fault litigation examiner stated that defendant had never received the summons, the complaint or the motion for a default judgment ( cf. Westchester Med. Ctr. v Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co., 69 AD3d 613). Accordingly, pursuant to CPLR 317, defendant met its burden of showing that it did not receive actual notice of the summons in time to defend the action. Furthermore, defendant established the existence of a meritorious defense to the action. Defendant submitted an affidavit from its litigation examiner in which he stated that the assignor had cancelled her insurance policy with defendant prior to the date of the accident and had not subsequently taken out another insurance policy with defendant.

In view of the foregoing, we find that the Civil Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment. Accordingly, the order is reversed and defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment is granted.

Pesce, P.J., Weston and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Nursing Homecare v. N.Y. Cent. Mt. Fire

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 10, 2010
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 50450 (N.Y. App. Term 2010)
Case details for

Nursing Homecare v. N.Y. Cent. Mt. Fire

Case Details

Full title:NURSING PERSONNEL HOMECARE A/A/O EVELYN WHITE, Respondent, v. NEW YORK…

Court:Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 10, 2010

Citations

2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 50450 (N.Y. App. Term 2010)
907 N.Y.S.2d 439

Citing Cases

State v. Hanes

With variations, which need not be noted here, that has been the practice throughout the history of this…

State, ex Rel., v. Doe

(Our italics.) In support of appellee's contention it relies on Peoples State Bank v. Hoisington Mercantile…