Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

Platonov v. Sciabarra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided May 27, 2003

305 A.D.2d 651; 759 N.Y.S.2d 883

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Walsh v. Walsh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Degennaro (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Caprio v. 1025 Manhattan Avenue Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Han v. Bark (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Sarva v. Chakravorty (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Philippi v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
NYCTL-1 Trust v. Liberty Bay Realty Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Die Matic Products, Inc. v. Flair International Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Eidelkind v. Winter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated April 9, 2002, which denied their motion, inter alia, to vacate their default in serving opposition papers to the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion, inter alia, to vacate their default in serving opposition papers to the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their default. Although the plaintiffs’ attorney claimed that he did not receive a copy of the defendant’s motion papers, his unsubstantiated excuse of nonreceipt was insufficient to rebut the proof that the motion papers were properly mailed and the presumption of receipt (see Matter of Aetna Life & Cas. Co. v Walker, 255 AD2d 381 [1998]; Orlando v Corning Inc., 213 AD2d 464 [1995]; Jeraci v Froehlich, 129 AD2d 557 [1987]).

In addition, the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate either the existence of good cause or that the interest of justice would be served by permitting late service of the complaint (see Leader v *652Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95 [2001]). Altman, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.