Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court's order which denied the defendant's motion to vacate her default was not an abuse of discretion. Regardless of whether the defendant's application was untimely (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]), there is no justification for allowing nearly three years to lapse after the denial of her prior motion to vacate her default
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.