Legal Opinion

Spira v. New York City Transit Authority

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

Decided March 27, 2008PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Under the circumstances, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the default judgment. While defendant’s excuse for its default, i.e., law office failure by reason of understaffing, is not particularly compelling, it constitutes “good cause” nonetheless (Casiano v City of New York, 245 AD2d 244 [1997]), especially since there is no evidence that plaintiff was prejudiced; on the other hand, defendant will be severely prejudiced if the motion is granted. Moreover, defendant showed an intent to defend, with its proffer of a stipulation seeking to extend the time to answer before…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Casiano v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. New Media Holding Co. v. KagalovskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. Cirillo v. Macy's, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  3. Lamar v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  4. McCagg v. Schulte Roth & Zabel LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  5. Rosenblatt v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014

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

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

Powered by the Exa API