From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hutchinson Burger, Inc. v. Bradshaw

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2017
149 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

04-18-2017

HUTCHINSON BURGER, INC., et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Kathleen R. BRADSHAW, Defendant–Respondent, Hutch Restaurant Associates, L.P., et al., Defendants.

Law Offices of K.C. Okoli, P.C., New York (K.C. Okoli of counsel), for appellants. Kathleen R. Bradshaw, Bronx, for respondent.


Law Offices of K.C. Okoli, P.C., New York (K.C. Okoli of counsel), for appellants.

Kathleen R. Bradshaw, Bronx, for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia Rodriguez, J.), entered December 10, 2015, which granted defendant Kathleen R. Bradshaw's motion for reargument, and, upon reargument, denied plaintiffs' motion for an extension of time to serve the summons, complaint, and amended complaint and for a default judgment against defendant, and dismissed all claims against defendant, without prejudice, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and defendant's motion denied in all respects.

The proper vehicle for defendant to challenge the October 2012 order, which was granted on her default, was a motion to vacate a default order under CPLR 5015(a)(1), and not a motion for renewal or reargument under CPLR 2221(d) and (e) (see Country Wide Home Loans, Inc. v. Dunia, 138 A.D.3d 533, 28 N.Y.S.3d 319 [1st Dept.2016] ["The court properly denied plaintiff's motion since the prior order was granted on default, and the proper remedy for plaintiff was to move to vacate the default pursuant to CPLR 5015, rather than by motion to renew"]; 300 W. 46th St. Corp. v. Clinton Hous. W. 46th St. Partners, L.P., 19 A.D.3d 136, 796 N.Y.S.2d 340 [1st Dept.2005] ; Vasquez v. Koret, 151 A.D.2d 448, 543 N.Y.S.2d 907 [1st Dept.1989] ; Siegel, New York Practice § 426 ). Accordingly, the motion court should have denied defendant's motion to renew or reargue.

SWEENY, J.P., RICHTER, ANDRIAS, WEBBER, GESMER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hutchinson Burger, Inc. v. Bradshaw

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2017
149 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Hutchinson Burger, Inc. v. Bradshaw

Case Details

Full title:HUTCHINSON BURGER, INC., et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Kathleen R…

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

Date published: Apr 18, 2017

Citations

149 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 2935
50 N.Y.S.3d 267

Citing Cases

US Bank v. Conk

The record reflects that the Defendant did not move to vacate that default (CPLR Rule 5015[a](1 ]) prior to…

Russo v. Dement

In his submissions, as well as in oral argument before the court on these combined applications, defendant…