From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brounstein v. Rubin

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
Dec 6, 2019
65 Misc. 3d 157 (N.Y. App. Term 2019)

Opinion

2018-1006 K C

12-06-2019

Steven L. BROUNSTEIN, Respondent, v. Desiree RUBIN, Defendant, and Harry Rubin, Appellant.

Law Office of Allen Schwartz, Esq. (Allen Schwartz of counsel), for appellant. Steven L. Brounstein, respondent pro se.


Law Office of Allen Schwartz, Esq. (Allen Schwartz of counsel), for appellant.

Steven L. Brounstein, respondent pro se.

PRESENT: MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J., MICHELLE WESTON, DAVID ELLIOT, JJ.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new determination, following a hearing, of defendant Harry Rubin's motion to vacate so much of the judgment entered June 26, 2017 as was entered against him and, upon such vacatur, to dismiss so much of the complaint as was asserted against him or, in the alternative, for leave to interpose an answer.

In this action to recover payment for legal services rendered, both defendants failed to appear or answer the complaint, and a judgment was entered against them in the total sum of $18,773.77. Harry Rubin (defendant) subsequently moved to vacate so much of the judgment as was entered against him pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (4) and, upon such vacatur, to dismiss so much of the complaint as was asserted against him or, in the alternative, to vacate so much of the judgment as was entered against him pursuant to CPLR 317, and, upon such vacatur, for leave to interpose an answer. The Civil Court denied defendant's motion.

For the reasons stated in Farkas v. Rubin ( ––– Misc 3d ––––, 2019 NY Slip Op –––– [appeal No. 2018-1008 K C], decided herewith), the order is reversed and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new determination, following a hearing, of defendant's motion to vacate so much of the judgment entered June 26, 2017 as was entered against him and, upon such vacatur, to dismiss so much of the complaint as was asserted against him or, in the alternative, for leave to interpose an answer.

WESTON and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.

PESCE, P.J., taking no part.


Summaries of

Brounstein v. Rubin

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
Dec 6, 2019
65 Misc. 3d 157 (N.Y. App. Term 2019)
Case details for

Brounstein v. Rubin

Case Details

Full title:Steven L. Brounstein, Respondent, v. Desiree Rubin, Defendant, and Harry…

Court:SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

Date published: Dec 6, 2019

Citations

65 Misc. 3d 157 (N.Y. App. Term 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 51970
119 N.Y.S.3d 809