Clarifying procedural rules on court filings, the Appellate Division, Second Department, has upheld a ruling that allowed a late answer to a lawsuit and denied a request for a default judgment. The family of a child, Raizel Fried, who was allegedly injured near a flatbed trailer, brought suit against the trailer's owner, Jacob Holding, serving the company in May 2010. The company did not timely appear or answer. A week after serving again, the Fried family moved for leave to enter a default judgment on liability in Fried v. Jacob Holding, 4450/10. At this point, the defendant filed opposition papers and effectively asked the court for leave to serve a late answer and to compel the family to accept the untimely answer.
Jacob Holding's application was not styled as a notice of cross motion in accordance with CPLR 2215. Still, Supreme Court Justice Linda Jamieson (See Profile) in Rockland County granted Jacob Holding's request.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
