Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Latoya Linen, Defendant-Respondent. (2026)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Latoya Linen, Defendant-Respondent.

570135 /22

Decided: October 21, 2026

PRESENT: Tisch, J.P., Perez, Alpert, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Appeal from orders (Carol E. Malcolm, J.), entered, respectively, June 24, 2025 and November 21, 2025, dismissed without costs, as nonappealable.

Inasmuch as plaintiff did not file opposition papers to defendant's motion for class certification, the June 24, 2025 order was entered on default within the meaning of CPLR 5511 and is nonappealable (see Armin A. Meizlik Co. Inc. v L & K Jewelry Inc., 68 AD3d 530 [2009]; Figiel v Met Food, 48 AD3d 330 [2008]). Plaintiff's remedy was to move to vacate its default on the motion and, if that was denied, to appeal the order denying the motion to vacate (see Figiel v Met Food, 48 AD3d at 330). A motion to reargue was not the proper remedy in these circumstances (see Luciano v Felix, 185 AD3d 469, 470 [2020]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur

Decision Date: October 21, 2026

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network