Opinion
March 30, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Meade, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We find no error in the determination of the Supreme Court that the defendants failed to establish that the judgment against them was procured by fraud (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [3]). The defendants' contention that the plaintiff was seeking to recover an illegal brokerage commission is nothing more than a newly interposed theory of defense which could have been asserted prior to the entry of judgment (see, Central Funding Co. v. Kimler, 54 A.D.2d 748). Equally unavailing is the defendants' contention that the judgment should have been vacated because Abacus Mortgage Investment Co. acted illegally in making a loan without first obtaining a license from the Superintendent of Banking as well as its argument that the court lacked jurisdiction to enter judgment (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [4]; Lacks v. Lacks, 41 N.Y.2d 71, rearg denied 41 N.Y.2d 862). Brown, J.P., Niehoff, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.