Walter v. Rockland Armor & Metal Corp.
Opinion of the Court
In view of the relatively short period of the delay, the absence of any claim of prejudice to the plaintiff, the existence of a possible meritorious defense, the absence of any willfulness on the appellants’ part and the public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits, the Supreme Court should have denied the cross motion and granted the appellants leave to file late answers (see, McNeill v Lasala, 115 AD2d 459). Eiber, J. P., Kooper, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.