Majority
Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion granted and judgment vacated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in determining that it lacked authority to grant plaintiffs motion to vacate the judgment annulling the parties’ marriage because the motion is not based upon any of the grounds enumerated in CPLR 5015 (a). “A court has inherent power, not limited by statute, to relieve a party from a judgment or order entered on default” (Town of Greenburgh v Schroer, 55 AD2d 602 ; accord, Ruben v American & Foreign Ins. Co., 185 AD2d 63 , 67). We conclude, in light of the “liberal policy with respect to vacating default judgments in matrimonial actions” (Schrader v Schrader, 152 AD2d 987 , 987-988; see, Dunbar v Dunbar, 233 AD2d 922 ; Fayet v Fayet, 214 AD2d 534 , 534-535; Anderson v Anderson, 144 AD2d 512 , 513), that plaintiff is entitled to relief from the judgment. The proof submitted by plaintiff, a native of Albania, establishes
Cases cited
- Ruben v. American & Foreign Insurance 185 AD2d 63 at 67 p. 928
- Fayet v. Fayet 214 AD2d 534 at 534-535 p. 928
- Querze v. Querze 290 NY 13 at 18 p. 929
- Stow v. L. Middleditch Co. 290 NY 765 at 926 p. 929
- Weiman v. Weiman 295 NY 150 at 154 p. 929