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.
Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, respondent, v. Consolidated Construction Group, LLC, et al., appellants.
Submitted—January 22, 2014
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Pines, J.), dated March 14, 2013, which denied their motion to vacate a judgment of the same court dated November 8, 2012, which was in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the total sum of $147,728.06.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A defendant seeking to vacate a default must provide a reasonable excuse for the default and demonstrate a potentially meritorious defense to the action (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v. A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138, 141; Yao Ping Tang v. Grand Estate, LLC, 77 AD3d 822, 822–823). “A decision to vacate a prior order or judgment rests in the sound discretion of the court and will be upheld in the absence of an improvident exercise of that discretion” (Epps v. LaSalle Bus, 271 A.D.2d 400).
Here, the appellants did not offer a reasonable excuse for their failure to appear at the inquest on damages (see White v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., 44 AD3d 651, 651–652; cf. Matter of Esposito, 57 AD3d 894, 895). Accordingly, it is unnecessary to consider whether the appellants sufficiently demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense (see Maida v Lessing's Rest. Servs., Inc., 80 AD3d 732, 733; Abdul v. Hirschfield, 71 AD3d 707, 709).
RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, COHEN and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
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: 2013–05704 (Index No. 13847 /10)
Decided: February 19, 2014
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)