From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Provencio Ltd.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 2008
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 51456 (N.Y. App. Term 2008)

Opinion

2007-1178 K C.

Decided July 8, 2008.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Kathy J. King, J.), entered May 18, 2007. The order denied defendant's motion to vacate a default judgment.

Order affirmed without costs.

PRESENT: GOLIA, J.P., RIOS and STEINHARDT, JJ.


In this breach of contract action, a default judgment was entered against defendant. After defendant's bank account had been levied upon for the full amount of the judgment and a satisfaction of judgment was filed, defendant moved to vacate the default judgment. Contrary to plaintiff's contention, although the judgment had been paid in full and a satisfaction of judgment filed, the court below continued to maintain jurisdiction to entertain a motion to vacate the judgment ( see Smithtown Gen. Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co., 111 AD2d 382, 383; Pergament Empl. Fed. Credit Union v Estrada, 2002 NY Slip Op 50577[U] [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 2002]).

It is well settled that in order to vacate a judgment on the ground of excusable default (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]), a defendant must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default as well as a meritorious defense to the action ( see Titan Realty Corp. v Schlem, 283 AD2d 568; Matter of Gambardella v Ortov Light., 278 AD2d 494). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the sound discretion of the court ( Matter of Gambardella v Ortov Light., 278 AD2d 494, supra; MacMarty, Inc. v Scheller, 201 AD2d 706). Defendant's corporate officer stated in support of the motion that he was unaware that the instant action had been commenced against defendant since he was neither personally served with the summons and complaint nor was he informed that service had been properly effectuated upon defendant in any other manner. A review of the affidavit of service annexed to plaintiff's summons and complaint indicates that the summons and complaint were served upon the managing agent of defendant corporation. Since defendant neither submitted an affidavit from its managing agent supporting defendant's reasonable excuse for defaulting nor provided an excuse for its failure to submit such affidavit, the court below properly denied defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment.

Golia, J.P., Rios and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Provencio Ltd.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 2008
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 51456 (N.Y. App. Term 2008)
Case details for

Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Provencio Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:TOWER INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PROVENCIO LTD.…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 2008

Citations

2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 51456 (N.Y. App. Term 2008)