Legal Opinion
Manhattan Telecommunications Corp. v. H & A Locksmith, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 30, 2013PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Smith, J.
CPLR 3215 (f) requires an applicant for a default judgment to file “proof of the facts constituting the claim.” In Woodson v Mendon Leasing Corp. (100 NY2d 62, 71 [2003]), we left open the question of whether non-compliance with this requirement is a jurisdictional defect that “renders a default judgment a ‘nullity.’ ” We now hold that the defect is not jurisdictional.
Plaintiff sued a number of corporations and an individual, Ariq Vanunu, alleging that plaintiff had provided telephone service to defendants pursuant to a written agreement, and had not been paid.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Wilson v. Galicia Contr. & Restoration Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2008
- Freccia v. GarulloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- State v. WilliamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Manhattan Telecommunications Corp. v. H & A Locksmith, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
3Cited by36 opinions
- Paulus v. Christopher Vacirca, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- 21st Mtge. Corp. v. RaghuAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Matter of Call-A-Head Portable Toilets, Inc. v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. ConservationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
- Uceta v. Sherwood, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Frazier v. 811 E. 178th St. Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.