January 10, 2006

Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car (2006 NY Slip Op 00141)

Headnote

The insurer obtained vacatur of an unopposed summary judgment order by presenting a reasonable excuse and a possible meritorious defense. The providers appealed only the portion of the order vacating their earlier summary judgment award in an action for no-fault medical payments. Under CPLR 5015 (a), the Supreme Court's exercise of discretion was supported by the excuse, the absence of willfulness, the lack of prejudice to the providers, and the possible defense. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the order, insofar as appealed from.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car (2006 NY Slip Op 00141)

Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car
2006 NY Slip Op 00141 [25 AD3d 534]
January 10, 2006
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, March 22, 2006


Hospital for Joint Diseases, as Assignee of Marla Sandler, et al., Appellants,
v
Dollar Rent A Car, Respondent.

—[*1]

In an action to recover no-fault medical payments under an insurance contract, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Cozzens, J.), dated December 14, 2004, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 29, 2004, granting their motion for summary judgment upon the defendant’s default in opposing the motion.

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

Based on, inter alia, (a) the reasonable excuse presented by the defendant for its default in opposing the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, including the absence of willfulness and the lack of prejudice to the plaintiffs, and (b) the existence of a possible meritorious defense, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to vacate the order dated July 29, 2004, granting the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for summary judgment (see CPLR 5015 [a]; see Orwell Bldg. Corp. v Bessaha, 5 AD3d 573, 574 [2004]; Presbyterian Hosp. in City of N.Y. v Empire Ins. Co., 220 AD2d 733, 734 [1995]). Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Lunn, JJ., concur.