From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singh v. Friedson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted October 24, 2001.

November 13, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated June 28, 2001, which denied his motion for leave to enter a judgment against the defendant Jon Friedson on the issue of liability upon his failure to appear or answer, and granted the defendants' cross motion to compel the plaintiff to accept the verified amended answer of the defendant Jon Friedson as timely served.

Barry Siskin, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Brand Brand, Garden City, N.Y. (Vincent J. Savino of counsel), for respondent and defendant Enterprise Rent-A-Car.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, the cross motion is denied, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.

A defendant seeking to oppose a plaintiff's motion for leave to enter a default judgment based upon his or her failure to appear or answer must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay and the existence of a meritorious defense (see, Gurreri v. Village of Briarcliff Manor, 249 A.D.2d 508; Pumarejo-Garcia v. McDonough, 242 A.D.2d 374). The respondent failed to demonstrate either element (see, Walkes v. Benoit, 257 A.D.2d 508; Pumarejo-Garcia v. McDonough, supra; Miles v. Blue Label Trucking, 232 A.D.2d 382). Therefore, the Supreme Court should have granted the motion for leave to enter a judgment against the respondent upon his default, and denied the cross motion to compel the plaintiff to accept the respondent's verified amended answer as timely served.

O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Singh v. Friedson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 2001
288 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Singh v. Friedson

Case Details

Full title:GURDHIAN SINGH, appellant, v. JON FRIEDSON, respondent, ET AL., defendant

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

Date published: Nov 13, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 880

Citing Cases

Singh v. Friedson

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. By decision and order dated November 13, 2001, this Court,…

Singh v. Friedson

In his cross motion to vacate his default, Friedson alleged a meritorious defense as to the happening of the…