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.
IN RE: JOHN REILLY, PETITIONER–APPELLANT, v. CITY OF ROME, ROME POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND JAMES MASUCCI, COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RESPONDENTS–RESPONDENTS.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, petitioner appeals from an order granting respondents' motion to vacate a default judgment. We note at the outset that, although no appeal as of right lies from an intermediate order in a CPLR article 78 proceeding (see CPLR 5701[b] [1] ), we treat the notice of appeal as an application for leave to appeal from the order and grant the application (see Matter of Conde v. Aiello, 204 A.D.2d 1029, 1029). It is well settled that the decision whether to vacate a default judgment is a matter within Supreme Court's discretion (see Alliance Prop. Mgt. & Dev. v Andrews Ave. Equities, 70 N.Y.2d 831, 832–833). Here, given that respondents proffered a reasonable excuse for failing to serve a timely answer to the petition and demonstrated a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Puchner v. Nastke, 91 AD3d 1261, 1261–1262), and considering the “strong public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits” (Moore v. Day, 55 AD3d 803, 804; see Puchner, 91 AD3d at 1262), we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in granting respondents' motion (see Cavagnaro v. Frontier Cent. Sch. Dist., 17 AD3d 1099, 1099). We note that, prior to the default, respondents engaged in settlement discussions with petitioner and filed a motion to dismiss the petition, thus evidencing a “good faith intent to defend” the proceeding on the merits (Coven v. Trust Co. of N.J., 225 A.D.2d 576, 576), and we further note that petitioner was not prejudiced by the slight delay in answering the petition (see Accetta v. Simmons, 108 AD3d 1096, 1097).
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: CA 13–00559
Decided: February 14, 2014
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)