From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pricher v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 25, 1998
251 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 25, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.).


Given that the order to show cause to vacate the default was obtained within a year of defendant having been served with a copy of the order holding it in default, the IAS Court properly exercised its "inherent power to consider applications seeking relief from a default judgment made more than one year after entry of the default judgment" (Hunter v. Enquirer/Star, Inc., 210 A.D.2d 32, 33). Further, it is clear that the default was not willful and that defendant always intended to defend the action and has a meritorious defense. Under the circumstances, including defendant's rebuffed service of a one-month late answer two days before the granting of the ex parte motion to hold it in default, and in view of the strong preference for resolving cases on the merits (supra), the default was properly vacated without imposition of any conditions.

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

Pricher v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 25, 1998
251 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Pricher v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:DAVID PRICHER, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 25, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
674 N.Y.S.2d 674

Citing Cases

Wyly v. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP

Such participation demonstrates a clear intent on respondents' part to defend this proceeding, and…

REMIS v. FRIED

Although H. H. Photographers of New York, Inc. was mistakenly omitted from the stipulation on motion sequence…