From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caesar v. Harlem USA Stores, Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 16, 2017
150 A.D.3d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

05-16-2017

Frank CAESAR, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. HARLEM USA STORES, INC., Defendant–Respondent.

Friedman Sanchez, LLP, Brooklyn (Jeffrey Bloomfield of counsel), for appellant. Donaldson & Chilliest, New York, (Anthony S. Chilliest of counsel), for respondent.


Friedman Sanchez, LLP, Brooklyn (Jeffrey Bloomfield of counsel), for appellant.

Donaldson & Chilliest, New York, (Anthony S. Chilliest of counsel), for respondent.

FRIEDMAN, J.P., RICHTER, MOSKOWITZ, GISCHE, KAPNICK, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered April 18, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment against it on the condition that defendant answer or respond within 20 days, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff brought this action against defendant after allegedly slipping and falling down a staircase at a retail clothing store located at 2309 Frederick Douglas Boulevard, New York, New York. The motion court properly granted defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment against it.

Defendant submitted a reasonable excuse for its default (see CPLR 5015[a] [1] ; Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v. A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138, 141, 501 N.Y.S.2d 8, 492 N.E.2d 116 [1986] ) via an affidavit from its president that shows that the wrong address was used for service of process.

Defendant also established a meritorious defense (see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc., 67 N.Y.2d at 141, 501 N.Y.S.2d 8, 492 N.E.2d 116 ; Stillwell Café, Inc. v. 1680

Eastchester Realty Corp., 145 A.D.3d 645, 646, 42 N.Y.S.3d 804 [1st Dept.2016] ), as its president denied that it operated a retail clothing store at the address where plaintiff was injured. Moreover, the clothing stores operated by defendant have no staircases, as they are entirely located on the ground floor. Defendant further provided evidence demonstrating that another entity was operating at the address where plaintiff's accident occurred.


Summaries of

Caesar v. Harlem USA Stores, Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 16, 2017
150 A.D.3d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Caesar v. Harlem USA Stores, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Frank CAESAR, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. HARLEM USA STORES, INC.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: May 16, 2017

Citations

150 A.D.3d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
150 A.D.3d 524
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 3918

Citing Cases

People v. N. Leasing Sys.

Even if raised as a basis to vacate a judgment, the defense will be effective only if the lessees and…

Hamilton v. 208-214 E 25th St LLC

The First Department extended and has held that "(1) the fact that the wrong address was used for service of…