Dave Sandel, Inc. v. Specialized Industrial Services Corp.
Decision Date | 26 December 2006 |
Docket Number | 2006-01481. |
Citation | 35 A.D.3d 790,2006 NY Slip Op 10010,826 N.Y.S.2d 735 |
Parties | DAVE SANDEL, INC., Appellant, v. SPECIALIZED INDUSTRIAL SERVICES CORP., Respondent. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion to vacate the judgment and for leave to serve a late answer is denied.
To vacate its default in answering or appearing, the defendant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Kurtz v Mitchell, 27 AD3d 697 [2006]; Binna Han v Chungwon Bark, 25 AD3d 586 [2006]). Under the circumstances presented in this case, the defendant's purported continued belief that its prior attorney was handling this case for it was unreasonable and, thus, does not excuse its default (see Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568, 568-569 [1997]). Moreover, where, as here, there is a pattern of default and neglect, the negligence of the attorney is properly imputed to the client (see Edwards v Feliz, 28 AD3d 512 [2006]; MRI Enters. v Amanat, 263 AD2d 530, 531 [1999]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendant's motion to vacate the judgment.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Slavinski
...Castanos, 71 A.D.3d 880, 895 N.Y.S.2d 857; Bank of N.Y. v. Segui, 42 A.D.3d 555, 840 N.Y.S.2d 408; Dave Sandel, Inc. v. Specialized Indus. Servs. Corp., 35 A.D.3d 790, 791, 826 N.Y.S.2d 735). The appellant's contentions that she "did not know [she] was suppose[d] to file an answer to this a......
-
Carillon Nursing & Rehab. Ctr., LLP v. Fox
...is properly imputed to the client ( see Santiago v. Santana, 54 A.D.3d 929, 930, 864 N.Y.S.2d 122;Dave Sandel, Inc. v. Specialized Indus. Servs. Corp., 35 A.D.3d 790, 791, 826 N.Y.S.2d 735;Edwards v. Feliz, 28 A.D.3d 512, 813 N.Y.S.2d 494;Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis, 238 A.D.2d 568, 569, 657 ......
-
Gershman v. Ahmad
...unreasonable (see Jackson v. Professional Transp. Corp., 81 A.D.3d 602, 603, 916 N.Y.S.2d 159 ; Dave Sandel, Inc. v. Specialized Indus. Servs. Corp., 35 A.D.3d 790, 826 N.Y.S.2d 735 ; Lemberger v. Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, Inc., 33 A.D.3d 671, 672, 822 N.Y.S.2d 597 ; Gainey v. Anorze......
-
Whitestone Constr. Corp. v. Nova Cas. Co.
...Inc., 62 A.D.3d 745, 877 N.Y.S.2d 901 ; Goody v. Lloyd, 43 A.D.3d 390, 391, 840 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Dave Sandel, Inc. v. Specialized Indus. Servs. Corp., 35 A.D.3d 790, 791, 826 N.Y.S.2d 735 ; Kumar v. Yonkers Contr. Co., Inc., 14 A.D.3d 493, 494, 788 N.Y.S.2d 408 ). In any event, the ECT defend......