General
Mail Boxes Etc. USA, Inc., Respondent, v. Rupert Higgins, Appellant, et al., Defendant
268 A.D.2d 244700 N.Y.S.2d 685·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2000·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Mail Boxes Etc. USA, Inc., Respondent, v Rupert Higgins, Appellant, et al., Defendant.
[700 NYS2d 685]
[MAJORITY]
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered April 8, 1999, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for an order striking plaintiffs answer to defendants’ counterclaims and directing a default judgment on the counterclaims (denominated a motion for summary judgment), and granted plaintiffs cross motion to the extent of granting plaintiff leave to serve a reply to counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The motion court’s determination excusing late service of a reply to counterclaims, which was a few days late at most, constituted a proper exercise of discretion (see, Continental Cas. Co. v Cozzolino Constr. Corp., 120 AD2d 779). We have considered appellant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.