From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Galante v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 2002
293 A.D.2d 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-00828

Argued February 28, 2002.

April 15, 2002.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for alleged violations of constitutional rights, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated December 12, 2000, which (1) denied their motions for leave to enter a judgment on the issue of liability upon the defendants' default in answering and for summary judgment on the issue of liability, and (2) granted the defendants' motion to vacate their default in answering and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Stock Carr, Mineola, N.Y. (Victor A. Carr of counsel), for appellants.

Lorna B. Goodman, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Gerald R. Podlesak of counsel; Robert Vadnais on the brief), for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the defendants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A defendant seeking to vacate a default in answering must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious defense (see Hospital for Joint Diseases v. Allstate Ins. Co., 283 A.D.2d 609; Matter of Gambardella v. Ortov Light., 278 A.D.2d 494). Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in permitting the defendants to vacate their default and interpose an answer (see Khanna v. Premium Food Sports Enter., 279 A.D.2d 508; Paradiso Assocs. v. Tamarin, 210 A.D.2d 386; Tugendhaft v. Country Estates Assoc., 111 A.D.2d 846).

The Supreme Court should have denied summary judgment to all parties, since there are material issues of fact to be resolved at trial (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320).

SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, FLORIO and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Galante v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 2002
293 A.D.2d 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Galante v. County of Nassau

Case Details

Full title:KAIA GALANTE, ETC., ET AL., appellants, v. COUNTY OF NASSAU, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Apr 15, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 568 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
740 N.Y.S.2d 225

Citing Cases

In re Statewide Ins. Co. v. Bradham

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is…