From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rakosi v. Daniel Perla Assocs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 22, 2004
3 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2727.

Decided January 22, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about October 23, 2002, which granted defendants-respondents' motions to dismiss the complaint as against them and denied plaintiff's cross motion to amend the complaint to add a necessary party, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant plaintiff's cross motion, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Evan R. Schieber, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Leonard J. Falcone, for Defendants-Respondents.

Richard C. Goldberg, for Defendants.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.


The action was properly dismissed as against defendants-respondents on the ground that it constitutes a collateral attack upon a prior judgment of foreclosure and sale. Although the evidence demonstrates that plaintiff was named and served in the foreclosure action, he defaulted and, rather than moving in that action under CPLR 5015 to vacate the resulting judgment, has impermissibly commenced a new plenary action alleging that the judgment was wrongfully obtained ( see Vinokur v. Penny Lane Owners Corp., 269 A.D.2d 226).

The motion court should, however, have granted plaintiff's cross motion to add a necessary party, Deca LLC, which may be inequitably affected by a judgment rendered in the remainder of this case against the non-moving defendants.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Rakosi v. Daniel Perla Assocs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 22, 2004
3 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Rakosi v. Daniel Perla Assocs

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL RAKOSI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DANIEL PERLA ASSOCIATES, L.P., ET…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 22, 2004

Citations

3 A.D.3d 431 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
772 N.Y.S.2d 648

Citing Cases

Reid v. Litton

Only the Court which rendered a judgment or order may relieve a party from it upon such terms as may be just,…

Parker Waichman v. Napoli

The fee agreements between the parties are only an incidental aspect of the overall global settlement…