Narrative Opinion Summary
In an appeal regarding property loss damages, the plaintiff contests a Supreme Court order from March 15, 1996, which allowed defendants R.A.F. Electrical Engineering and Rafael Rollo to vacate a prior order from September 30, 1994, that had granted a default judgment due to their late answer. The appellate court affirmed the March 15 order, noting that the defendants provided a reasonable explanation for their default and presented a valid defense against the plaintiff’s claims. The decision included costs awarded to the defendants. Judges Bracken, Santucci, Friedmann, and Goldstein concurred with the ruling.
Legal Issues Addressed
Awarding Costs in Appellate Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision to affirm the order included awarding costs to the defendants, illustrating the court's discretion in allocating costs in appellate proceedings.
Reasoning: The decision included costs awarded to the defendants.
Setting Aside Default Judgmentssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirmed the decision to vacate a default judgment based on the defendants' reasonable explanation for their default and the presentation of a valid defense.
Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the March 15 order, noting that the defendants provided a reasonable explanation for their default and presented a valid defense against the plaintiff’s claims.