X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Defendant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Denise M. Dominguez, J.), entered January 3, 2020, which denied her motion to renew a prior order denying her motion to vacate a default judgment. Per Curiam Order (Denise M. Dominguez, J.), entered January 3, 2020, reversed, without costs, renewal granted, and upon renewal, default judgment vacated on condition that within 60 days after service of a copy of this order with notice of entry, defendant tenders $150 to plaintiff. Although renewal motions generally should be based on newly discovered facts that could not have been offered on the prior motion (see CPLR 2221[e]), courts have discretion to relax this requirement and grant such a motion in the interest of justice (see Mejia v. Nanni, 307 AD2d 870, 871 [2003]). Under the unique circumstances here, and to achieve substantial fairness (see Tishman Constr. Corp. of N.Y. v. City of New York, 280 AD2d 374, 376-377 [2001]), we grant defendant’s renewed motion to vacate the default judgment, since defendant offered a “reasonable justification” for failing to submit the new evidence on her original pro se motion and the new evidence “would change the prior determination” (CPLR 2221[e][2],[3]). In this regard, defendant set forth a reasonable excuse for defaulting on plaintiff’s March 15, 2017 motion to reinstate the default judgment, inasmuch as that motion was served at a prior address and not served upon defendant at her current residence, the address designated in the parties’ September 1998 stipulation of settlement. Defendant also established a meritorious defense to the underlying motion. In the September 1998 stipulation settling this action, defendant agreed to pay a total of $3,500, by an initial $1,500 payment and monthly installments until the balance was satisfied. In the event of a breach, defendant could enter judgment for $7,370, plus interest, less any payments made by defendant under the stipulation. It is undisputed that, except for the final payment of the $150 balance due under the stipulation, defendant tendered and plaintiff accepted all installment payments. Although the final payment was tendered by defendant, it was rejected as untimely by plaintiff. In these circumstances, and considering defendant’s overall compliance with the stipulation, the minor nature of the default and the harsh result which would obtain upon literal enforcement of the stipulation, to wit, a judgment in an amount far greater than the negotiated settlement (see Bank of N.Y. v. Forlini, 220 AD2d 377, 378 [1995]), we afford defendant the opportunity to make full payment of the final $150 payment due, in full satisfaction of the stipulation of settlement. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. Dated: December 18, 2020

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
September 04, 2025
New York, NY

The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.


Learn More
February 24, 2025 - February 26, 2025
Las Vegas, NV

This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.


Learn More
March 24, 2025
New York, NY

Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.


Learn More

The Court of Appeal, First Appellate District in San Francisco is accepting applications for a full-time regular Judicial Secretary I, Judic...


Apply Now ›

The County is looking for a skilled and seasoned County Attorney to oversee the Law Department in delivering top-tier legal services, repres...


Apply Now ›

Position Summary: The Corporate General Counsel will manage and coordinate all legal and compliance matters affecting the company. The Gen...


Apply Now ›