From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curto v. Diehl

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Sep 30, 2011
87 A.D.3d 1374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-09-30

Patricia J. CURTO, Plaintiff–Appellant,v.Mark DIEHL and Melissa Schmigel, Defendants–Respondents. (Appeal No. 1.)


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (James H. Dillon, J.), dated December 17, 2009. The order granted the motion of defendants to vacate a default judgment and ordered plaintiff to provide discovery.Patricia J. Curto, plaintiff-appellant pro se.Hagelin Kent LLC, Buffalo (Victor M. Wright of Counsel), for defendants-respondents.MEMORANDUM:

We reject the contention of plaintiff that Supreme Court erred in granting that part of defendants' motion to vacate a default judgment. Inasmuch as defendants had previously appeared in this action, they were entitled to receive notice of plaintiff's motion for a default judgment ( see CPLR 3215[g][1]; Nowak v. Oklahoma League for the Blind, 289 A.D.2d 995, 735 N.Y.S.2d 313). Plaintiff failed to provide defendants with such notice, and thus her motion for a default judgment was defective. We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, and GORSKI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Curto v. Diehl

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Sep 30, 2011
87 A.D.3d 1374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Curto v. Diehl

Case Details

Full title:Patricia J. CURTO, Plaintiff–Appellant,v.Mark DIEHL and Melissa Schmigel…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Sep 30, 2011

Citations

87 A.D.3d 1374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
929 N.Y.S.2d 901
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 6773