From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

East New York Savings Bank v. Sun Beam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1998
256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 8, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.).


Defendant Integra's initial motion to vacate the default judgment against it was properly denied ( 248 A.D.2d 245) and its subsequent reargument motions, repetitive of the initial motion and/or each other, were patently meritless and, indeed, frivolous ( see, Foley v. Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, 567-568) and, as such, proper grounds for the imposition of sanctions and/or costs, which we find appropriate in amount. Contrary to Integra's argument, the motion court's order adequately sets forth the objectionable conduct, the reason it was found to be frivolous, and an explanation of the sanctions imposed ( see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.2). While the order by its terms imposes "sanctions", properly payable to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection under 22 NYCRR 130-1.3, it is clear that the award of "sanctions" was actually intended by the motion court as an award of costs to be utilized to cover the legal expenses incurred by plaintiff as a consequence of the vexatious litigation occasioned by defendant-appellant.

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

East New York Savings Bank v. Sun Beam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1998
256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

East New York Savings Bank v. Sun Beam

Case Details

Full title:EAST NEW YORK SAVINGS BANK, Respondent, v. SUN BEAM ENTERPRISES, INC., et…

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

Date published: Dec 8, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 78 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 244

Citing Cases

RR Capital LLC v. Merritt

This Court cannot review the determinations of the Pennsylvania Pinhooking Action or the Delaware Removal…