Sidi v. Sidi
Opinion of the Court
—In a matrimonial action in which the parties were
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment entered upon his default in appearing (see, Conner v Conner, 240 AD2d 614; Morel v Clacherty, 186 AD2d 638; Shaw v Shaw, 97 AD2d 403; CPLR 5015). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.