From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hermele v. Sumkin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 2001
282 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted March 9, 2001.

April 5, 2001.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Incorporated Village of Freeport appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.), dated May 16, 2000, which denied its motion for leave to serve a late answer.

Forchelli, Curto, Schwartz, Mineo, Carlino Cohn, LLP, Mineola, N Y (Matthew G. Roseman of counsel), for appellant.

Markotsis Lieberman, Hicksville, N.Y. (Douglas M. Lieberman of counsel), for respondents.

Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion for leave to serve a late answer. The appellant failed to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for its failure to timely answer and a meritorious defense to the action (see, Gambardella v. Ortov Lighting, 278 A.D.2d 494 [2d Dept., Dec. 26, 2000]; Parker v. City of New York, 272 A.D.2d 310; Gleissner v. Singh, 264 A.D.2d 811; Kyriacopoulos v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 216 A.D.2d 532; De Vito v. Marine Midland Bank, 100 A.D.2d 530).


Summaries of

Hermele v. Sumkin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 2001
282 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Hermele v. Sumkin

Case Details

Full title:JERRY HERMELE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. IRA SUMKIN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS…

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

Date published: Apr 5, 2001

Citations

282 A.D.2d 502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
722 N.Y.S.2d 889