230 SEAMAN ASSOCIATES LLC v. MULLAHEY (2019)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York.

230 SEAMAN ASSOCIATES LLC, Petitioner-Landlord-Appellant, v. Diane MULLAHEY, Respondent-Tenant-Respondent.

570071 /19

Decided: October 18, 2019

PRESENT: Ling-Cohan, J.P., Gonzalez, J.

Order (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered May 18, 2018, reversed, without costs, motion denied, and money judgment reinstated.

Civil Court erred in vacating the consent money judgment entered pursuant to the parties' November 2007 so-ordered stipulation of settlement. Respondent failed to establish that the judgment had been satisfied (see CPLR 5021; Matter of Quiggle v. Quiggle, 144 AD2d 1011 [1988]). Although respondent asserted that the principal amount of the judgment was ultimately paid, she failed to recognize that interest has accrued since the judgment was entered in 2007 (see CPLR 5003, 5004; Feldman v. Brodsky, 12 AD2d 347 [1961], affd 11 NY2d 692 [1962]). Nor did respondent establish any other basis for vacating the judgment (see CPLR 5015[a]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

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Out of date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