You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Marine Bulkheading, Inc. v. Mannino

Citations: 2017 NY Slip Op 4108; 150 A.D.3d 1096; 52 N.Y.S.3d 639Docket: 2016-01530

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; May 24, 2017; New York; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by Marine Bulkheading, Inc. in a breach of contract lawsuit against Joseph Mannino. The initial court had entered a default judgment against Mannino for failing to comply with a stipulated settlement. Upon appeal, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York vacated the default judgment. It concluded that Mannino, having previously appeared in the action, was entitled to notice of the default judgment application under CPLR 3215(g). Furthermore, the court found that the Clerk overstepped authority by entering judgment without further notice, as the stipulation did not permit such action under CPLR 3215(i). While the decision to vacate the judgment was upheld, the Appellate Division modified the order to eliminate an unrequested directive for specific performance of the settlement, as neither party sought such relief. The ruling achieved concurrence among all justices present, ultimately affirming the vacatur of the default judgment while disallowing the unrequested specific performance order.

Legal Issues Addressed

Authority of Clerk to Enter Default Judgment under CPLR 3215(i)

Application: The court determined that the Clerk did not have the authority to enter the default judgment without further notice to the defendant as the stipulation did not permit such action.

Reasoning: The court determined that the Clerk lacked authority to enter the default judgment without further notice to Mannino, as the stipulation did not permit such action under CPLR 3215(i).

Notification of Default Judgment under CPLR 3215(g)

Application: The court emphasized that a defendant who has previously appeared in action must be notified of a default judgment application.

Reasoning: The court found that Mannino had a right to be notified of the default judgment application since he had previously appeared in the action, as supported by CPLR 3215(g).

Specific Performance Not Requested by Parties

Application: The court modified the order to remove an unrequested provision for specific performance, as such relief was not sought by either party.

Reasoning: While the court upheld the decision to vacate the default judgment, it modified the order to remove a provision that sua sponte directed specific performance of the stipulation of settlement, stating that such relief was not sought by either party.