La Vin v. La Vin — 279 A.D. 873

Majority

p. 873

Edwin R. La Vin, Appellant, v. Russell C. La Vin et al., Defendants, and Sanford Hotel Corp., Respondent.

Since respondent’s default was deliberate and intentional, and there was no adequate showing of a meritorious defense, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion. (Colonial Fuel Corp. v. Kahn, 214 App. Div. 83 ; Booraem v. Gibbons, 263 App. Div. 665 ; Scordo v. Terrell, 275 App. Div. 940 ; Chaplin v. Selznick, 186 Misc. 66 , 68-69.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Wenzel, MacCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur. [See post, p. 1088; 280 App. Div. 895 .]

Cases cited

Chaplin v. Selznick 186 Misc. 66 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1945-10-26 at 68-69 p. 873