Legal Opinion

Gonzales v. Treppiedi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 11, 1996PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Default may be excused upon a showing of a meritorious defense and a justifiable excuse for the delay or the default (see, Barasch v Micucci, 49 NY2d 594, 599; Kyriacopoulos v Mendon Leasing Corp., 216 AD2d 532; Korea Exch. Bank v Attilio, 186 AD2d 634). The physician’s affidavit in this case established that the respondents have a meritorious defense against the plaintiff’s claim. Moreover, the determination of *588what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies in the sound discretion of the court (see, Barasch v Micucci, supra, at 599; Bardales v Blades, 191 AD2d 667, 668; 38 Holding Corp. v City of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Barasch v. MicucciNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. 38 Holding Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  3. Bardales v. BladesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  4. Picinic v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  5. Kyriacopoulos v. Mendon Leasing Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Hermes Agency & Ship Supplies Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API