From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC v. Lurzer GmbH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 24, 2002
297 A.D.2d 590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

1610N

September 24, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered April 3, 2001, which denied defendant's motion to vacate a default judgment entered against it, but which vacated the judgment's award of damages and referred the matter for an inquest as to damages, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

MICHAEL S. CRYAN, for plaintiff-appellant.

ZEB LANDSMAN, for defendant-respondent.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley, Ellerin, Marlow, JJ.


It is well settled that a default judgment may be determinative of liability but not the amount of damages to be awarded, unless there can be no dispute as to the amount due, the amount sought being a "sum certain" (see Rokina Optical Co. v. Camera King, 63 N.Y.2d 728, 730;Reynolds Secs. v. Underwriters Bank Trust Co., 44 N.Y.2d 568; see also CPLR 3215[a]). Accordingly, inasmuch as claims for attorneys' fees, such has those made in this action, are not ordinarily amenable to characterization as claims for "sums certain" (see e.g. Lonstein v. Seeman, 112 A.D.2d 96; see also Reynolds Secs., supra, at 572) — and, indeed, the record indicates that the amount due plaintiff is and has, in fact, been a subject of ongoing dispute between the parties — the motion court properly directed an inquest as to damages.

We have considered plaintiff's remaining contention and find it unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC v. Lurzer GmbH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 24, 2002
297 A.D.2d 590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC v. Lurzer GmbH

Case Details

Full title:ARENT FOX KINTNER PLOTKIN KAHN, PLLC, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. LURZER GMBH…

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

Date published: Sep 24, 2002

Citations

297 A.D.2d 590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
747 N.Y.S.2d 179

Citing Cases

Watson Farley & Williams LLP v. Bay Bridge Tex., LLC

Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn v. Lurzer GmbH, 297 A.D.2d 590 (1st Dep't 2002); Reynolds Secs. v.…

Verizon N.Y. v. 880 Pac. Lofts

While defendants in default admit "all traversable allegations in the complaint, including the basic…