IGS Realty Co. v. James Catering, Inc.

Full title: IGS Realty Co., L.P., Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, v. James Catering…

Court: APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT

Date published: Jan 23, 2012

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 50070 (N.Y. App. Term 2012)

946 N.Y.S.2d 67

Opinion

570674/11

01-23-2012

IGS Realty Co., L.P., Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, v. James Catering, Inc., d/b/a Loft Eleven, Respondent-Tenant-Appellant. IGS Realty Co., L.P., Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, West Side Loft at 37th Street, Inc., Respondent-Tenant-Appellant. IGS Realty Co., L.P., Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, Loft Eleven Incorporated, Respondent-Tenant-Appellant.

Schoenfeld

PRESENT: , P.J., Hunter, Jr., J.

Tenants appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered December 6, 2010, which denied their combined motion to vacate the default final judgments issued against them in consolidated nonpayment summary proceedings.

Per Curiam.

Order (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered December 6, 2010, affirmed, with $10 costs.

We find no abuse of discretion in the denial of tenants' combined motion to vacate the default final judgments issued in October 2009 in these consolidated nonpayment proceedings. Tenants failed to adequately explain their claimed inability to retain replacement counsel by the adjourned date set by the court following the withdrawal of original counsel or the ensuing 10-month delay (through August 2010) in moving to vacate their default in these "summary" proceedings. Neither tenants' purported December 2009 firing of successor counsel (Marcus), who, it is noted, appears to have continued to represent tenants thereafter in contemporaneous Supreme Court litigation involving landlord, nor any failed settlement negotiations with landlord, which tenant acknowledges ended no later than May 2010, constitutes a legally acceptable excuse for the tenants' prolonged pattern of inaction and delay (see Pergolis-Schwartz, Inc. v Biberaj, 280 AD2d 323 [2001]; Collier, Cohen, Crystal & Bock v Fisher, 206 AD2d 260 [1994]). Tenants' failure to set forth a reasonable excuse makes it unnecessary to consider whether there was a meritorious defense (see Time Warner City Cable v Tri State Auto, Inc., 5 AD3d 113 [2004]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.