Legal Opinion
Karamuco v. Cohen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 27, 2011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
To vacate their default in opposing the motion of the defendant Janel Celaj for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her, the plaintiffs were required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for their default and a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion (see Donovan v Chiapetta, 72 AD3d 635 [2010]; Aurora Loan Servs. v Grant, 70 AD3d 986 [2010]). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the trial court’s discretion (see Zarzuela v Castanos, 71 AD3d 880 [2010]; Santiago v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 10 AD3d 393,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Santiago v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Donovan v. ChiapettaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Aurora Loan Services v. GrantAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Zarzuela v. CastanosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dokaj v. Ruxton Tower Ltd. PartnershipAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Bhuiyan v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Glauber v. EksteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Muir v. ColemanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Muir v. ColemanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012