From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Pere v. 1470-1488 U R Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 27, 2000
268 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued November 22, 1999

January 27, 2000

In a proceeding pursuant to Business Corporation Law Article 11 for judicial dissolution of 1470-1488 U R Inc., that corporation appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.), dated February 23, 19 98, which, inter alia, directed it to pay 20% of certain funds held in escrow in partial satisfaction of a judgment of the same court, dated February 20, 1997, and (2) an order of the same court dated August 5, 1998, which denied its motion to vacate (a) an order of the same court dated June 11, 1996, which, upon its default, granted a receiver's motion to settle an account and disperse funds, and (b) a judgment of the same court dated September 27, 1996, which, after a hearing, is in favor of Sol Mermelstein and against it for an attorney's fee in the amount of $19,100.

John Z. Marangos, Staten Island, N.Y., for appellant.

Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler Schwartz, P.C., New York, N Y (Paul N. Gruber and Jeffrey Metz of counsel), for respondent Harriet M. Polinsky.

Sol Mermelstein, Brooklyn, N.Y., respondent pro se.

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, LEO F. McGINITY, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.

There was sufficient evidence to justify the piercing of the corporate veil to the extent granted here, directing the appellant corporation to pay the debt of one of its principals, given the complete disregard of corporate formalities and the personal use of corporate funds by the principal ( see, Austin Powder Co. v. McCullough, 216 A.D.2d 825, 826).

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion to vacate its defaults since it failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the defaults and a meritorious defense ( see, Kolajo v. City of New York, 248 A.D.2d 512; Gerry's Foods of Oceanside v. Blue Ridge Farms, Inc., 143 A.D.2d 679; Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis, 238 A.D.2d 568.

The corporation's remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., JOY, McGINITY, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Pere v. 1470-1488 U R Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 27, 2000
268 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Pere v. 1470-1488 U R Inc.

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF SCOTT PERE, petitioner, v. 1470-1488 U R INC., appellant…

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

Date published: Jan 27, 2000

Citations

268 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
702 N.Y.S.2d 310

Citing Cases

Rotella v. Derner Builders, Inc.

nature" and dependent "on the attendant facts and equities" ( Matter of Morris v. New York State Dept. of…

In the Matter of Morrison

ORDERED that the Clerk of this court, or his designee, is directed to serve the respective parties or their…