Taylor Appraisals v. Prokop
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
To vacate his default in opposing the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the complaint, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Walker v Mohammed, 90 AD3d 1034 [2011]; Roche v City of New York, 88 AD3d 978, 979 [2011]; Casali v Cyran, 84 AD3d 711 [2011]; Simpson v Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc., 48 AD3d 389, 392 [2008]). “While law office failure can be accepted as a reasonable excuse in the exercise of a court’s sound discretion, the movant must submit supporting facts to…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Simpson v. Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Merrill Lynch Realty/Carll Burr, Inc. v. SkinnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Walker v. MohammedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Cole-Hatchard v. Grand UnionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Morrison v. RosenbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Elusma v. JacksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Lanzillo v. 4 World Trade Ctr., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams. v. Hwa Joong YoonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Airtight Security Systems, Inc. v. 2350, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Airtight Security Systems, Inc. v. 2350, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.