Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Thomas ABATE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Ruth S. LONG, Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered January 5, 1998, which denied plaintiffs' motion to vacate the court's order of dismissal dated September 23, 1997, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the motion to vacate granted and the complaint reinstated.
Given our preference for disposition of cases on the merits (see, Santora & McKay v. Mazzella, 211 A.D.2d 460, 463, 620 N.Y.S.2d 395; DFI Communications, Inc. v. Golden Penn Theatre Ticket Serv., 87 A.D.2d 778, 779, 449 N.Y.S.2d 485), we find that the motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiffs' motion to vacate their default where they had demonstrated a meritorious cause of action and a reasonable excuse for their default (see, Santora & McKay v. Mazzella, supra at 463, 620 N.Y.S.2d 395; Glass v. Janbach Prop., Inc., 73 A.D.2d 106, 110, 425 N.Y.S.2d 343). The record clearly shows that their affidavit of merit, erroneously found to have raised a new theory of liability for which there had been no discovery, did no more than properly state, with greater specificity, a theory of medical malpractice that had been generally claimed in the bill of particulars. No new facts were alleged; thus defendant would not have been misled or prejudiced. Counsel's showing of actual engagement in another court constituted reasonable excuse for the default (see, Zatorski v. Klein, 11 A.D.2d 790, 204 N.Y.S.2d 922; Malcolm M. Slaughter & Co. v. Saul, 53 N.Y.S.2d 73[App. Term 1945] ).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 20, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)