AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

VITO NICHOLAS CARNAZZA, Respondent, v. SHOPRITE OF STATEN ISLAND, Appellant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

A party seeking to vacate an order entered upon default is required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default, and the existence of a meritorious cause of action or defense ( see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Henry v. Kuveke, 9 AD3d 476; Weekes v. Karayianakis, 304 AD2d 561; Parker v. City of New York, 272 AD2d 310). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse for a default lies within the sound discretion of the Supreme Court ( see London v. Iceland Inc., 306 AD2d 517; J.P. Equip. Rental Materials v. Fidelity Guar. Ins. Co., 288 AD2d 187; Parker v. City of New York, supra). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in finding that the plaintiff provided a reasonable explanation for his default in opposing two motions ( see Miller v. Doniger, 256 AD2d 244; Wilson v. Misericordia Hosp., 244 AD2d 163; McNeil v. Milstein, 240 AD2d 549; Lanc v. Donnelly, 184 AD2d 840; see also Russo v. Russo, 289 AD2d 467; Parisi v. McElhatton, 209 AD2d 495). Furthermore, the plaintiff's submissions were sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CARNAZZA v. SHOPRITE OF STATEN ISLAND
(Nov 8, 2004)