From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meeker v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 9, 1990
160 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

April 9, 1990

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


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for determination of the plaintiffs' damages and entry of an appropriate judgment.

In order to be relieved from his default in answering the complaint, the defendant was required to submit an acceptable excuse for his default as well as an affidavit indicating that he had a meritorious defense to the action (see, Fidelity Deposit Co. v. Andersen Co., 60 N.Y.2d 693; Pansey v. RKO Gen., 102 A.D.2d 762). The defendant failed to satisfy either of these requirements, and there is nothing in the record which indicates that there is any merit to his position (cf., Sanders Assocs. v. Hague Dev. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 964).

We further note that, contrary to the defendant's argument, CPLR 3020 (b) is clearly inapplicable to the complaint herein, and therefore the defendant was not entitled to completely ignore the complaint because it was unverified. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Meeker v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 9, 1990
160 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Meeker v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:ALICE MEEKER et al., Appellants, v. ROBERT J. MOORE, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 9, 1990

Citations

160 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Liberty Cnty. Mut. v. Ave. I Med., P.C.

Thus, the respondents did not establish that they had not defaulted ( see Jaffery v. MacMillan & Webb…