From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Treo Enterprises v. O'Neill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 25, 1971
36 A.D.2d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)

Opinion

January 25, 1971


In a real property mortgage foreclosure action, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 17, 1970, which (1) granted a motion by defendants O'Neill to open their default in answering the complaint and to permit them to serve an answer and (2) stayed the appointed Referee from computing pursuant to a previous order. Order reversed, without costs, and motion denied. In this record there is no adequate showing by defendants O'Neill of a satisfactory excuse for their default or a meritorious defense to the action (General Obligations Law, § 5-521, subd. 1; Matter of Waldman, 32 A.D.2d 780, affd. 25 N.Y.2d 677; General Phoenix Corp. v. Cabot, 300 N.Y. 87; Salvin v. Myles Realty Co., 227 N.Y. 51; Elias v. Schwartz, 22 Misc.2d 129; Koppell v. McNeil, 21 Misc.2d 237; Margulis v. Messinger, 34 Misc.2d 699, 702; Leader v. Dinkler Mgt. Corp., 20 N.Y.2d 393; Hoffman v. Nashem Motors, 20 N.Y.2d 513; Hirsch v. Buono Tire Co., 29 A.D.2d 545, affd. 22 N.Y.2d 930). Hence, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to open their default (CPLR 5015; Bouxsein v. Bialo, 35 A.D.2d 523; Krebs v. Raborg, 30 A.D.2d 520; Hurley v. Reoux, 29 A.D.2d 789; Koppell v. McNeil, supra). Munder, Acting P.J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Treo Enterprises v. O'Neill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 25, 1971
36 A.D.2d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)
Case details for

Treo Enterprises v. O'Neill

Case Details

Full title:TREO ENTERPRISES, Appellant, v. JOSEPH D. O'NEILL et al., Respondents, et…

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

Date published: Jan 25, 1971

Citations

36 A.D.2d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971)

Citing Cases

John Malasky, Inc. v. Mayone

In this case, the defendants not only failed to answer, despite repeated demands, but failed to file a notice…

Jamaica Savings Bank v. Sutton

A valid tender requires not only readiness and ability to perform, but actual production of the thing to be…