From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Andersen v. De Ramon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 1984
99 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

January 16, 1984


In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Buell, J.), dated June 8, 1983, which granted defendant De Ramon's motion to vacate his default in answering the verified complaint. Order affirmed, with costs. On the totality of the circumstances recited and in light of the recent legislation that has served to repeal the Barasch-Eaton rule ( Barasch v Micucci, 49 N.Y.2d 594; Eaton v Equitable Life Assur. Soc., 56 N.Y.2d 900; see CPLR 2005, 3012, subd [d]; L 1983, ch 318), we conclude that the court properly exercised its discretion in relieving defendant De Ramon of the consequences of his default upon the payment to plaintiff of $250 ( Robinson v USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 97 A.D.2d 837; Tehan v Tehan, 97 A.D.2d 840; cf. Zaldua v Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 97 A.D.2d 842). Mollen, P.J., Gibbons, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Andersen v. De Ramon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 1984
99 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Andersen v. De Ramon

Case Details

Full title:SHELLY ANDERSEN, Appellant, v. EDWARD R. DE RAMON, Respondent, et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 16, 1984

Citations

99 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Santangelo v. Raskin

In interpreting the pertinent provisions of CPLR 3012, it has been held that to avoid a dismissal for the…