From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilmore v. Gilmore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 2001
279 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted December 7, 2000.

January 16, 2001.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Mahon, J.), dated November 10, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to find him in contempt for the willful failure to comply with a pendente lite order of the same court (Kutner, J.), dated June 24, 1996, and denied his cross motion to vacate an order of preclusion of the same court (Kutner, J.), dated September 16, 1996, entered upon his default in opposing it.

Jerry Winter, P.C., Garden City, N.Y., for appellant.

Kruman Kruman, P.C., Malverne, N.Y. (Henry E. Kruman of counsel), for respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant's motion to vacate a prior order of preclusion was untimely since it was brought approximately three years after the order with notice of entry was served on him (see, CPLR 5015[a]). In addition, the defendant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the default (see, Blackman v. Blackman, 131 A.D.2d 801; Spatz v. Bajramoski, 214 A.D.2d 436).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Gilmore v. Gilmore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 2001
279 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Gilmore v. Gilmore

Case Details

Full title:CAROL B. GILMORE, RESPONDENT, v. ROY GILMORE, APPELLANT

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

Date published: Jan 16, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
720 N.Y.S.2d 350

Citing Cases

Gilmore v. Gilmore

The trial court providently exercised its discretion in awarding the plaintiff an interim attorney's fee in…