Opinion
2002-1723 5 C.
Decided November 21, 2003.
Appeal by plaintiff, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the District Court, Suffolk County (P. Barton, J.), dated September 18, 2002, as denied his motion to enter a default judgment and dismissed the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
Order unanimously affirmed without costs.
PRESENT: DOYLE, P.J., WINICK and SKELOS, JJ.
It is well settled that "where a valid cause of action is not stated, the party moving for judgment is not entitled to the requested relief, even on default" ( Green v. Dolphy Constr. Co., 187 AD2d 635, 636; Dyno v. Rose, 260 AD2d 694, 698; Cree v. Cree, 124 AD2d 538, 541). The court below properly found that, as a matter of law, the conduct of the defendant did not constitute a private nuisance in that it did not substantially and unreasonably interfere with the plaintiff's use of his own property.