From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nadel v. Breitfeld

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 28, 1992
188 A.D.2d 645 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 28, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Given the repeated neglect on the part of the appellant's attorney, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to vacate the default judgment (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Chery v Anthony, 156 A.D.2d 414; Singer v Singer, 136 A.D.2d 695; Cobbs v Run Tr., 111 A.D.2d 363). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Nadel v. Breitfeld

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 28, 1992
188 A.D.2d 645 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Nadel v. Breitfeld

Case Details

Full title:JEROME NADEL et al., Respondents, v. LAWRENCE E. BREITFELD, Appellant, et…

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

Date published: Dec 28, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 645 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

Fleming v. Beckerman

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs. The Supreme Court providently exercised its…