From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDermott v. Hoenig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 30, 1969
32 A.D.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

June 30, 1969


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated October 14, 1968, which denied appellants' motion to vacate a default judgment entered by the clerk of said court against them. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and appellants' motion granted. It being undisputed that neither the complaint nor a notice pursuant to CPLR 305 (subd. [b]) was served with the summons, we are constrained to hold that the default judgment is a nullity. The clerk was without authority to enter the judgment absent proof of service of the summons and complaint or a summons and notice (CPLR 3215, subds. [a], [e]; Malone v. Citarella, 7 A.D.2d 871). Except for this jurisdictional requirement, we would have affirmed the order because appellants failed to demonstrate either excusable neglect or a meritorious defense. Christ, Acting P.J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

McDermott v. Hoenig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 30, 1969
32 A.D.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

McDermott v. Hoenig

Case Details

Full title:CYRIL T. McDERMOTT, Respondent, v. WILLIAM J. HOENIG et al., Appellants…

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

Date published: Jun 30, 1969

Citations

32 A.D.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
302 N.Y.S.2d 280

Citing Cases

Wagenknecht v. Lo Russo

Prior to 1978, our practice permitted the institution of an action by service of a bare summons without…

Parker v. Mack

d in the complaint or stated in the notice served pursuant to subdivision (b) of rule 305," the conference…