Opinion
No. 884 CA 22-00147
11-18-2022
IN THE MATTER OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW BY THE COUNTY OF ONTARIO, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. JOHN MESSERVEY, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
JASON S. DIPONZIO, ROCHESTER, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. WHITCOMB LAW FIRM, P.C., CANANDAIGUA (DAVID J. WHITCOMB OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
JASON S. DIPONZIO, ROCHESTER, FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
WHITCOMB LAW FIRM, P.C., CANANDAIGUA (DAVID J. WHITCOMB OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Charles A. Schiano, Jr., J.), entered July 16, 2021. The order, among other things, granted the motion of respondent to vacate a default judgment of foreclosure.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this in rem tax foreclosure proceeding pursuant to RPTL article 11, petitioner appeals from an order that, following a hearing, granted the motion of respondent by, among other things, vacating the default judgment of foreclosure against respondent's residential property. Contrary to petitioner's contention, we conclude that Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in vacating the default judgment of foreclosure "for sufficient reason and in the interests of substantial justice" (Woodson v Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62, 68 [2003]; see Matter of County of Genesee [Butlak], 124 A.D.3d 1330, 1331 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 904 [2015]; see also Matter of County of Ontario [Lundquist 1996 Living Trust], 155 A.D.3d 1567, 1567-1568 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 30 N.Y.3d 912 [2018]; Matter of County of Ontario [Middlebrook], 59 A.D.3d 1065, 1065 [4th Dept 2009]). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and conclude that none warrants reversal or modification of the order.