At page 887 defendants’ motion for summary judgment upon the plaintiffs’ default in opposing the motion. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. To vacate a…4 citing cases
- Mora v. Scarpitta, 52 A.D.3d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008).publishedCo., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]; Montague v Rivera, 50 AD3d 656 [2008]; Perez v Han Ki Man, 39 AD3d 521 [2007]; Itskovich v Lichenstadter, 2 AD3d 406, 407 [2003]; Beale v Yepes, 309 AD2d 886, 887 [2003]).
- Montague v. Rivera, 50 A.D.3d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008).publishedCo., 67 NY2d 138, 141 [1986]; Perez v Han Ki Man, 39 AD3d 521 [2007]; Psomatithis v Transoceanic Cable Ship Co., Inc., 39 AD3d 837 [2007]; Oyebola v Makuch, 10 AD3d 600, 601 [2004]; Itskovich v Lichenstadter, 2 AD3d 406, 407 [2003]; Beale…
- Abrams v. City of New York, 13 A.D.3d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2004).publishedCELR 5015 (a) (1) permits a court to vacate a default where the moving plaintiff demonstrates both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see Lopez v Tierney & Courtney Overhead Door Sales C…
- Huggins v. Parkset Supply, Ltd., 24 A.D.3d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2005).publishedContrary to their contention, the Atlas defendants failed to establish that their default was excusable pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1). “[B]are allegations of incompetence on the part of prior counsel” are insufficient to establish an excus…
v.
Jose M. Yepes
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated September 9, 2002, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court, dated October 1, 2001, which granted the[*887] defendants’ motion for summary judgment upon the plaintiffs’ default in opposing the motion.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
To vacate a default, a plaintiff must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see CPLR 5015 [a]; Sicari v Hung Yuen Wong, 286 AD2d 489 [2001]). The plaintiffs’ counsel’s bare allegations of law office failure on the part of prior counsel cannot serve as the basis to set aside a judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (see Gourdet v Hershfeld, 277 AD2d 422 [2000]; Eretz Funding v Shalosh Assoc., 266 AD2d 184 [1999]; Spatz v Bajramoski, 214 AD2d 436 [1995]; Blackman v Blackman, 131 AD2d 801, 805 [1987]). Furthermore, the plaintiffs failed to submit any evidence sufficient to satisfy the serious injury threshold set forth in Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see Sarot v Yusufov, 301 AD2d 512 [2003]; Waaland v Weiss, 228 AD2d 435 [1996]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion to vacate. Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.