From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Paige v. Lucatorto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 25, 2002
292 A.D.2d 581 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-05262

Submitted February 20, 2002.

March 25, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for nonpayment of a debt, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated May 18, 2001, which, after an inquest, dismissed the action with prejudice.

Friedman Harfenist, Lake Success, N.Y. (Neil Torczyner of counsel), for appellants.

Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., ANITA R. FLORIO, SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, and THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting therefrom the words "with prejudice" and substituting therefor the words "without prejudice;" as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellants, as the executrixes of their father's estate, sought to recover on a debt allegedly owed by the defendant to the decedent. Although the Supreme Court granted the appellants' motion for leave to enter a judgment on the defendant's default on the issue of liability, the appellants failed to submit any admissible evidence at the inquest to support the entry of a judgment for damages (see CPLR 3215[f]; 22 NYCRR 202.46). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the action. The dismissal, however, should have been without prejudice.

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, S. MILLER, FRIEDMANN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Paige v. Lucatorto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 25, 2002
292 A.D.2d 581 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Paige v. Lucatorto

Case Details

Full title:ANDREA K. PAIGE, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. ANTHONY LUCATORTO, RESPONDENT

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

Date published: Mar 25, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 581 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 611

Citing Cases

Abbas v. Cole

At an inquest on damages, a defaulting defendant is entitled to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses, and…