General
Maria Dolores Tanpinco et al., Appellants, v. Royal Caribbean International et al., Defendants, Corporate Travel Services et al., Respondents
79 A.D.3d 484911 N.Y.S.2d 625·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2010·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
Maria Dolores Tanpinco et al., Appellants, v Royal Caribbean International et al., Defendants, Corporate Travel Services et al., Respondents.
[911 NYS2d 625]
[MAJORITY]
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered June 16, 2009, which, upon plaintiffs motion for a default judgment against defendants Corporate Travel Services and Corporate Travel Services, Inc., and said defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, directed defendants to serve their answer within 20 days, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendants demonstrated a reasonable excuse for their delay in answering the complaint, i.e., that their insurance carrier failed to forward the complaint to counsel (see Heskel’s W. 38th St. Corp. v Gotham Constr. Co. LLC, 14 AD3d 306, 307 [2005]). The record shows no willful default on defendants’ part and no prejudice to plaintiffs as a result of the delay (see Pagan v Four Thirty Realty LLC, 50 AD3d 265 [2008]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sweeny, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.