Although the Marriot defendants timely interposed an answer to plaintiff's complaint setting forth 12 affirmative defenses, they did not answer the complaint on behalf of their employee, individual defendant McLeod, for whom they are answerable in the action (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388), because they were not aware that he had been served with process. However, in response to this motion for entry of judgment against McLeod, the Marriot defendants have...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
