From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ortiz v. Medina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 2000
273 A.D.2d 9 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

June 1, 2000.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered December 7, 1999, which denied defendant's motion to vacate a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Arnold E. DiJoseph III, for plaintiffs-respondents.

Jonathan Uejio, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Williams, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rubin, Friedman, JJ.


Defendants' argument that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over them cannot be used as a means of vacating the default judgment resulting from defendants' failure to serve an answer or appear. Defendants, who were well aware of the action against them, failed to challenge the court's jurisdiction properly, by raising their objection either by motion or in an answer (see, CPLR 320 and 3211 PLR N.Y.CPLR[a]). Were we to consider defendants' jurisdictional argument, we would find it to be without merit, since the record demonstrates that both defendants were properly served.

Although defendants, in support of their motion for vacatur, advanced a meritorious defense, they failed to provide a valid excuse for their default and, accordingly, vacatur was properly denied (see, Ocasio v. City of New York, 186 A.D.2d 520; Maese v. Arkin, 187 A.D.2d 400).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Ortiz v. Medina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 2000
273 A.D.2d 9 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Ortiz v. Medina

Case Details

Full title:OMAR ORTIZ, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ERIC STEVEN MEDINA, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jun 1, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 9 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 401

Citing Cases

Kennedy v. Estate of Kennedy

Since the record before the Court demonstrates a pattern of neglect, same should be considered intentional…

Hearst Magazines v. R.H. Partners, Inc.

Defendants' failure to establish an excusable default renders moot their claim of a meritorious defense…