Majority
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law with costs and so much of order as required security vacated. Memorandum: Under the circumstances of this case, it was an abuse of discretion for Supreme Court to condition the grant of defendant’s vacatur application upon the posting of security. Here, there was no showing of any circumstances to warrant the requirement of posting security (see, Mark IV Homes v Evans Gardens, 57 AD2d 701 , 702). Moreover, its imposition is inappropriate where, as here, it effectively serves to deprive a defendant of his day in court (see, Congress Talcott Corp. v Pacemakers Trading Corp., 161
Cases cited
- Mark IV Homes, Inc. v. Evans Gardens, Inc. 57 AD2d 701 at 702 p. 1140
- Rubin v. Payne 103 AD2d 946 p. 1141