From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kramer v. Oil Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 2009
65 A.D.3d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2008-08494.

August 4, 2009.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for injury to property, the third-party defendant Environmental Services appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Cozzens, J.), entered August 6, 2008, as denied its motion to vacate a prior order of the same court entered October 4, 2007, granting the defendant third-party plaintiff's unopposed motion for leave to enter judgment on the issue of liability against it, upon its failure to appear or answer.

Cozen O'Connor, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Edward Hayum and Eric Berger of counsel), for third-party defendant-appellant.

Fishman McIntyre, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Scott A. Grossman of counsel), for defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent.

Before: Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ., concur.


Ordered the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

A defendant seeking to vacate its default in appearing or answering the complaint must provide a reasonable excuse for the default and demonstrate the existence of a meritorious defense to the action ( see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Lemberger v Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, Inc., 33 AD3d 671, 672; Krieger v Cohan, 18 AD3d 823; Kaplinsky v Mazor, 307 AD2d 916). The only excuse proffered by the appellant for the default in serving a timely answer was the more than one-year delay caused by its insurance carrier in providing a defense which, under the circumstances, was insufficient ( see Toland v Young, 60 AD3d 754; Martinez v D'Alessandro Custom Bldrs. Demolition, Inc., 52 AD3d 786; Canty v Gregory, 37 AD3d 508; Lemberger v Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, Inc., 33 AD3d at 672; Krieger v Cohan, 18 AD3d 823; Hegarty v Ballee, 18 AD3d 706). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion.


Summaries of

Kramer v. Oil Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 2009
65 A.D.3d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Kramer v. Oil Services

Case Details

Full title:NANCY KRAMER, Plaintiff, v. OIL SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Third-Party…

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

Date published: Aug 4, 2009

Citations

65 A.D.3d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 6121
882 N.Y.S.2d 906

Citing Cases

Trepel v. Greenman–Pedersen, Inc.

In support of its motion pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(1), Promo–Pro was required to demonstrate a reasonable…

Shapouri v. Molinelli

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. A defendant seeking to vacate its…