From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Child-Fit Mfg. Co. v. Pillow Express

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 26, 1958
17 Misc. 2d 147 (N.Y. App. Term 1958)

Opinion

November 26, 1958

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, HERMAN C. STOUTE, J.

Joseph Haskell and Emmet L. Holbrook for appellant.

Abel Just for respondent.


Defendant failed to show adequate excuse for its original default and for the delay of approximately seven months in moving to set aside the inquest of which it had direct knowledge. It failed to show facts indicating a meritorious defense to the action and neglected to submit a proposed answer on the application to open its default.

It exhibited a callous and deliberate disregard of court process and proceedings, until its bank account was tied up by the service of a third-party subpoena and one of its customers served in an attempt to collect the judgment.

It was not entitled to the exercise of the court's discretion in its favor and its application should have been denied. (See White Lbr. Millwork Corp. v. Andreola, 3 A.D.2d 945.)

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs, defendant's motion denied and judgment reinstated.

Concur — HECHT, J.P., STEUER and TILZER, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Child-Fit Mfg. Co. v. Pillow Express

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 26, 1958
17 Misc. 2d 147 (N.Y. App. Term 1958)
Case details for

Child-Fit Mfg. Co. v. Pillow Express

Case Details

Full title:CHILD-FIT MFG. CO., INC., Appellant, v. PILLOW EXPRESS, INC., Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Nov 26, 1958

Citations

17 Misc. 2d 147 (N.Y. App. Term 1958)
183 N.Y.S.2d 900

Citing Cases

Boxer v. Topalian

GUY GILBERT RIBAUDO, J. Even though the courts are prone to allow the opening of default judgments, the…