From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trippe v. Trippe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 30, 1985
113 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

September 30, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Duberstein, J.).


Order affirmed, with costs.

Notwithstanding the liberal policy of vacating defaults in matrimonial actions, the record establishes that the defendant (an attorney) threatened to, and in fact did, obstruct and delay plaintiff; failed to comply with a pendente lite order for maintenance and support; failed to submit to an examination before trial; failed to file a form affidavit regarding his finances and flouted court orders pertaining to those same subjects. Further, his answer was stricken for failure to comply with conditional orders. In any case, the defendant's motion papers are conclusory and do not contain any competent evidence of merit. Under all of these circumstances, we hold that Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to vacate his default in appearing at the proceedings held on July 11, 1983 (see, Rapp v Rapp, 59 A.D.2d 737; Gaglio v Gaglio, 63 A.D.2d 667; Abramson v Abramson, 55 A.D.2d 519; McCarthy v Chef Italia, 105 A.D.2d 992). Mangano, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Trippe v. Trippe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 30, 1985
113 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Trippe v. Trippe

Case Details

Full title:CAROLYN I. TRIPPE, Respondent, v. GERARD A. TRIPPE, Appellant

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

Date published: Sep 30, 1985

Citations

113 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Meisl v. Meisl

The defendant herein failed to present either a reasonable excuse for his failure to answer or a meritorious…

Lamothe v. Lamothe

ting that portion of the original determination, and (2) deleting the provision thereof which directs a…