March 28, 2006
New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 02344)
https://www.beynensonlaw.com/case-law/new-york-presbyt-hosp-v-travelers-prop-cas-ins-co-2006-ny-slip-op-02344/
- Decided
- March 28, 2006
- Citation
- 2006 NY Slip Op 02344 · 27 AD3d 708
- Posture
- Default or vacatur
- Outcome
- Insurer prevailed
- Issues
- Defaults and vacatur
- Legal questions
- Vacating a default: excuse and defense (see the maps)
Posture, outcome, issues and treatment by other decisions are Beynenson Law’s classification. Treatment labels are assigned by a language model reading the citing decision; negative and appeal-history labels are checked by a second reader.
Summary
Editorial summary by Beynenson Law, not part of the court’s decision.
Reported in New York Official Reports at New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 02344)
| New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. |
| 2006 NY Slip Op 02344 [27 AD3d 708] |
| March 28, 2006 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| New York and Presbyterian Hospital, as Assignee of William Browne, et al., Appellants, et al., Plaintiff, v Travelers Property Casualty Insurance Company, Respondent. |
—[*1]In an action to recover no-fault medical payments, the plaintiffs New York and Presbyterian Hospital, as assignee of William Browne, and New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens, as assignee of Amy Kazane, appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feinman, J.), dated July 15, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion to vacate a judgment of the same court entered March 11, 2005, upon its failure to appear or answer the complaint, and for leave to serve a late answer.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
To vacate its default, the defendant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car, 25 AD3d 534 [2006]; Hospital for Joint Diseases v ELRAC, Inc., 11 AD3d 432 [2004]). The defendant made that showing. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment entered upon its failure to appear or answer the complaint, and for leave to interpose a late answer. Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ., concur.
Legal questions
A question of no-fault law this decision rules on, from our Legal Questions pages. Bars count the decisions on the question by year and court, coloured by category; circles are this decision and the decisions on the question it cites or that cite it. Point at a bar or circle for details. The categories and summaries are Beynenson Law’s classification, made by a language model and checked by a second reading.
Did the defaulting party show a reasonable excuse (or lack of notice) and a potentially meritorious defense or claim?
This decision: Excuse (or lack of actual notice under CPLR 317) and potentially meritorious defense or claim shown; default vacated or late answer allowed
Upheld vacatur of the judgment entered on the insurer's failure to appear or answer, and leave to serve a late answer, because the insurer showed both a reasonable excuse and a meritorious defense.
Of the 170 decisions on this question in the Second Department courts and the Court of Appeals, 67 (this one included) are in the same category.
Cited in this decision
- Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car (2006 NY Slip Op 00141)The insurer obtained vacatur of an unopposed summary judgment order by presenting a reasonable excuse and a possible meritorious defense.
- Hospital for Joint Diseases v ELRAC, Inc. (2004 NY Slip Op 07140)An unanswered verification demand tolls the 30-day payment-or-denial period under 11 NYCRR 65.15 (g) (1) (i).
Cited by
- New York Univ. Hosp. Rusk Inst. v Illinois Natl. Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 05601)The insurers established a reasonable excuse for their default and potentially meritorious verification and policy-exhaustion defenses.
- Lefferts Med., Inc. v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 51136(U))A provider that accepts and retains an insurer's late answer waives its right to obtain a default judgment.
Similar decisions
- New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Auto One Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 02509)The insurer showed a reasonable excuse for its brief answering delay and potentially meritorious defenses, warranting default vacatur.
- New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v American Home Assur. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 02510)The insurer established grounds to vacate its default through an excuse tied to a misspelled insured's name and a meritorious coverage defense.
- New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2006 NY Slip Op 04260)The insurer obtained default vacatur under CPLR 317 by showing untimely actual notice of the summons and meritorious defenses.
- New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Clarendon Natl. Ins. Co. (2004 NY Slip Op 09609)The insurer's motion to vacate its default judgment was denied on appeal because it failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse.
- New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens v Insurance Co. of State of Pa. (2005 NY Slip Op 01691)The insurer failed to establish a meritorious defense required to vacate the provider's default judgment.