From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Figiel v. Food

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 26, 2008
48 A.D.3d 330 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2877.

February 26, 2008.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered November 21, 2006, which granted defendants' motion on default to strike the complaint and dismissed the action with prejudice, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Fasulo, Shalley DiMaggio, LLP, New York (Louis V. Fasulo of counsel), for appellant.

Faust Goetz Schenker Blee LLP, New York (Lisa L. Gokhulsingh of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Tom, Nardelli, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.


Although characterized as a default judgment, relief granted under CPLR 3126 (3) is directly appealable because such an order is made on notice, thus enabling the defaulting party to contest the motion ( Champion v Wilsey, 150 AD2d 833, 834). Here, however, the order was based on Plaintiffs failure to oppose the motion. No appeal lies from an order entered on the default of an aggrieved party (CPLR 5511). Plaintiffs remedy was to move to vacate his default and, if that was denied, to appeal the order denying the motion to vacate ( see F.W. Myers Co. v Owsley Sons, 192 AD2d 927).

Were we to consider the issues raised, we would affirm. Dismissal of the complaint was a proper exercise of judicial discretion in light of Plaintiffs long-standing pattern of noncompliance with court orders and discovery demands (CPLR 3126; see Goldstein v CIBC World Mkts. Corp., 30 AD3d 217). Plaintiffs failure to offer a reasonable excuse for his noncompliance gives rise to an inference of willful and contumacious conduct ( Siegman v Rosen, 270 AD2d 14).


Summaries of

Figiel v. Food

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 26, 2008
48 A.D.3d 330 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Figiel v. Food

Case Details

Full title:ZBIGNIEW FIGIEL, Appellant, v. MET FOOD et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 26, 2008

Citations

48 A.D.3d 330 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1615
851 N.Y.S.2d 524

Citing Cases

Blue River Gems Inc. v. S.V. & V. Diamond Corp.

would also have failed to investigate the provenance of the necklace despite the existence of "red flags"…

Verizon N.Y., Inc. v. Consol. Edison, Inc.

Further, the court may infer wilfulness from a history of noncompliance (General Motors Acceptance Corp. v.…