From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ionian Construction, Inc. v. Stiftung

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 21, 1994
202 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 21, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

"The decision as to the setting aside of a default in appearing and answering is generally left to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court * * * the exercise of which will generally not be disturbed if there is support in the record therefor" (Mondrone v. Lakeview Auto Sales Serv., 170 A.D.2d 586). A defendant moving to vacate a default in answering must present a reasonable excuse for the delay and a meritorious defense (see, Brosnan v Behette, 186 A.D.2d 165). We are satisfied that the defendant Stiftung in the present case provided a reasonable excuse for his delay in answering. Further, contrary to the plaintiffs' contentions, the record demonstrates that he has met the requirement of establishing a meritorious defense by affidavit of a person with sufficient knowledge of the facts (see, Fidelity Deposit Co. v. Andersen Co., 60 N.Y.2d 693). Thompson, J.P., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ionian Construction, Inc. v. Stiftung

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 21, 1994
202 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Ionian Construction, Inc. v. Stiftung

Case Details

Full title:IONIAN CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al., Appellants, v. MORGRAN STIFTUNG…

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

Date published: Mar 21, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 553 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 825

Citing Cases

Sullivan v. Brooklyn-Caledonian Hospital

It was not an improvident exercise of the Supreme Court's discretion to excuse the defendant's default in…