From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rent-A-Car v. Holders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 18, 2006
31 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2005-06204.

July 18, 2006.

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, Nashon Holder appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J), dated May 6, 2005, which denied his motion, in effect, to vacate a prior order of the same court dated December 3, 2004, entered upon his default, which granted the petition.

Before: Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion, in effect, to vacate because the appellant's conclusory and unsubstantiated excuse of law office failure did not amount to a reasonable excuse for his failure to oppose the petition ( see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Hye-Young Chon v Country-Wide Ins. Co., 22 AD3d 849; Grezinsky v Mount Hebron Cemetery, 305 AD2d 542; Eretz Funding v Shalosh Assoc, 266 AD2d 184, 185).


Summaries of

Rent-A-Car v. Holders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 18, 2006
31 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Rent-A-Car v. Holders

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ELRAC, INC., Doing Business as ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR…

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

Date published: Jul 18, 2006

Citations

31 A.D.3d 636 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 5784
817 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

White v. Chrysler Corp.

In order to vacate their default in answering the complaint, the appellants were required to demonstrate a…

Simpson v. Town of Southampton

In seeking to vacate their default in opposing the plaintiffs' motion, the defendants were required to…