Rogers v. Rogers
Opinion of the Court
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
“Although this Court has adopted a liberal policy with respect to vacating defaults in matrimonial actions, it is still within the Supreme Court’s discretion to determine whether a default should be vacated” (Ogazi v Ogazi, 46 AD3d 646 [2007]). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs cross motion to open her default and vacate so much of the judgment of divorce as awarded the defendant ancillary relief, including equitable distribution of the marital residence and custody of the child. It was still incumbent upon the plaintiff to show a reasonable excuse for her default and a meritorious claim (see Atwater v Mace, 39 AD3d 573 [2007]). The plaintiff failed to establish a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear for the inquest, having illegally absconded with the couple’s child to California. Prudenti, P.J., Fisher, Miller and Lott, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.