May 19, 2005

SZ Med. P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50746(U))

Headnote

The court considered the circumstances surrounding a default judgment entered against the defendant in an action to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical services rendered to the plaintiffs' assignors. The main issue decided was whether the lower court had improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment. The holding was that the lower court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the defendant's motion to vacate the default judgment, and therefore the order was affirmed without costs.

Reported in New York Official Reports at SZ Med. P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50746(U))

SZ Med. P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co. (2005 NYSlipOp 50746(U)) [*1]

SZ Med. P.C. v Allstate Ins. Co.

2005 NYSlipOp 50746(U)

Decided on May 19, 2005

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on May 19, 2005

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: May 19, 2005 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS PRESENT :PATTERSON, J.P., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ.
2004-766 Q C

SZ MEDICAL P.C. LIFE CHIROPRACTIC P.C. SOMUN ACUPUNCTURE P.C. a/a/o Stanley Napoleon Anthony Baptiste Jacques Kessada Charles Webens, Appellants,
against
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the Civil Court, Queens County (D. Butler, J.), entered March 10, 2004, which granted defendant’s motion, inter alia, to vacate a default judgment.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

In this action to recover first-party no-fault benefits for medical services rendered
to plaintiffs’ assignors, a default judgment was entered against defendant. A motion to vacate a default judgment is addressed to the sound discretion of the motion court and the court’s determination “will be upheld in the absence of an improvident exercise of that discretion” (Braddy v 601 Crown St. Corp., 282 AD2d 638, 639 [2001]). Upon the totality of the circumstances presented, it cannot be said that the court below improvidently exercised its discretion in granting defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment.
Decision Date: May 19, 2005