Reich v. Redley, 96 A.D.3d 1038 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). · Go Syfert
Search
Reich v. Redley, 96 A.D.3d 1038 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
48 citation events (48 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens by Proceeding in Rem. Village/Town of Scarsdale (Kreuter) (nyappdiv, 2016-11-23)
Treatment trajectory · 2012 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2012 2019 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens by Proceeding in Rem. Village/Town of Scarsdale (Kreuter)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
The absence of a reasonable excuse renders it unnecessary to determine whether the appellant demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense (see Citimortgage, Inc. v Bustamante, 107 AD3d at 753 ; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Aurora Loan Services, LLC v. Lucero
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Trust Co. v Quinones, 114 AD3d 719 , 719 [2014]; Bank of N.Y. v Samuels, 107 AD3d 653 , 653 [2013]; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1038 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Williamson v. Marlou Cab Corp.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
The absence of a reasonable excuse renders it unnecessary to determine whether the defendant demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense (see U.S. Bank N.A. v Hasan, 126 AD3d 683 [2015]; Citimortgage, Inc. v Bustamante, 107 AD3d 752, 753 [2013]; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Community West Bank, N.A. v. Stephen
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Furthermore, insofar as the moving defendants moved pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate their default, they failed to establish a reasonable excuse for their default, since the only excuse they proffered was that Joseph was not served with process (see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Miller, 121 AD3d at 1046 ; Bank of N.Y. v Samuels, 107 AD3d 653 , 654 [2013]; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Hasan
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
The absence of a reasonable excuse renders it unnecessary to determine whether the defendant demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense (see Citimortgage, Inc. v Bustamante, 107 AD3d at 753 ; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n v. Miller
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
In any event, Sewajo failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his default in failing to appear or answer the complaint, since the only excuse he offered was that he was not served with process (see Bank of N.Y. v Samuels, 107 AD3d at 654; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) WRIGHT, MARIE M. v. DENARD, MICHAEL (2×) also: Cited "see"
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
The af *1331 fidavit of plaintiffs process server constituted prima facie evidence that defendant was personally served pursuant to CPLR 308 (1) (see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1038 [2012]), and defendant failed to rebut the presumption of proper service by providing “specific facts to rebut the statements in the process server’s affidavit[ ]” (Indymac Fed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stevens v. Charles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
The defendant’s bare and unsubstantiated assertion that he did not receive the complaint was insufficient to establish a reasonable excuse for his default (see Chichester v Alal-Amin Grocery & Halal Meat, 100 AD3d 820 [2012]; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]; Pezolano v Incorporated City of Glen Cove, 71 AD3d 970, 971 [2010]; Roberts v Anka, 45 AD3d 752, 754 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stevens v. Charles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
The defendant’s bare and unsubstantiated assertion that he did not receive the complaint was insufficient to establish a reasonable excuse for his default (see Chichester v Alal-Amin Grocery & Halal Meat, 100 AD3d 820 [2012]; Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]; Pezolano v Incorporated City of Glen Cove, 71 AD3d 970, 971 [2010]; Roberts v Anka, 45 AD3d 752, 754 [2007]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Russell
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied Russell’s motion for leave to renew (see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Russell
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied Russell’s motion for leave to renew (see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038, 1039 [2012]).
cited Cited "see" Abdelqader v. Abdelqader
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
Trust Co. v Quinones, 114 AD3d 719 , 719 [2014]; see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038 [2012]; Citimortgage, Inc. v Phillips, 82 AD3d *1276 1032 [2011]).
discussed Cited "see" Indymac Federal Bank FSB v. Quattrochi
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
“Since [the appellant] failed to offer a reasonable excuse, it is unnecessary to consider whether [it] sufficiently demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense” (Lane v Smith, 84 AD3d 746, 748 [2011]; see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038 [2012]).
discussed Cited "see" Indymac Federal Bank FSB v. Quattrochi
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
“Since [the appellant] failed to offer a reasonable excuse, it is unnecessary to consider whether [it] sufficiently demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense” (Lane v Smith, 84 AD3d 746, 748 [2011]; see Reich v Redley, 96 AD3d 1038 [2012]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alexander Reich
v.
Dwight Redley
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jun 27, 2012.
96 A.D.3d 1038
Cited by 32 opinions  |  Published

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Dwight Redley appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated December 9, 2009, which denied his motion to vacate his default in appearing or answering the complaint, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court dated August 20, 2010, as denied that branch of his motion which was for leave to renew his prior motion to vacate.

Ordered that the order dated December 9, 2009, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated August 20, 2010, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court properly denied the motion of the defendant Dwight Redley to vacate his default in appearing or answering the complaint. Insofar as Redley moved to vacate his default pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (4) for lack of jurisdiction, the affidavit of the plaintiffs process server constituted prima facie evidence of proper service pursuant to CPLR 308 (1) (see Tribeca Lending Corp. v Crawford, 79 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2010]; Matter of Perskin v Bassaragh, 73 AD3d 1073 [2010]; Scarano v Scarano, 63 AD3d 716 [2009]). Redley’s bare and unsubstantiated denial of service in this case was insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service created by the plaintiffs duly executed affidavit of service (see Citimortgage, Inc. v Phillips, 82 AD3d 1032 [2011]; Valiotis v Psaroudis, 78 AD3d 683 [2010]; Prospect Park Mgt., LLC v Beatty, 73 AD3d 885 [2010]; Pezolano v Incorporated City of Glen Cove, 71 AD3d 970, 971 [2010];[*1039] Sturino v Nino Tripicchio & Son Landscaping, 65 AD3d 1327 [2009]; European Am. Bank v Abramoff, 201 AD2d 611 [1994]). Moreover, insofar as Redley moved also to vacate his default pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) by demonstrating a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious defense (see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]), he “failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his default since the only excuse he proffered was that he was not served with process” (Stephan B. Gleich & Assoc. v Gritsipis, 87 AD3d 216, 221 [2011]; see Pezolano v Incorporated City of Glen Cove, 71 AD3d at 971). As Redley failed to offer a reasonable excuse, “it is unnecessary to consider whether [he] sufficiently demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense” (Lane v Smith, 84 AD3d 746, 748 [2011]).

The Supreme Court also properly denied that branch of Redley’s motion which was for leave to renew his motion to vacate his default in appearing or answering, as he failed to offer a reasonable justification for his failure to submit the purported new facts at the time of the prior motion (see CPLR 2221 [e] [3]; Mount Sinai Hosp. v Country Wide Ins. Co., 85 AD3d 1136, 1138 [2011]; Jordan v Yardeny, 84 AD3d 1172, 1173 [2011]; Zito v Jastremski, 84 AD3d 1069, 1071 [2011]). In any event, the new facts would not have changed the prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Davidoff v East 13th St. Tifereth Place, LLC, 84 AD3d 1302, 1303 [2011]; Jordan v Yardeny, 84 AD3d at 1173; Zito v Jastremski, 84 AD3d at 1071). Mastro, A.P.J., Balkin, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.