Legal Opinion

Jaskiel v. Tsatskis

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

Decided December 9, 2008PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the defendant, in connection with the original motion for leave to enter a default judgment, did not fully litigate the issues of whether he had a reasonable excuse for his default in appearing or answering the complaint or had a meritorious defense to the action. Consequently, the Supreme Court was not precluded from considering the defendant’s subsequent motion pursuant to CFLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate his default in appearing or answering the complaint (see Szilaski v Aphrodite Constr. Co., 247 AD2d 532 [1998]; Britvan v Sutton & Edwards, 226 AD2d 491…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fekete v. Camp SkwereAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. Amato v. Fast Repair, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  3. Picinic v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  4. Szilaski v. Aphrodite Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  5. Britvan v. Sutton & Edwards, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Finnegan v. MurphyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API