Key Takeaway
New York court confirms that parties seeking to vacate default orders under CPLR 5015(a)(1) must prove their motion was filed within the one-year deadline.
Default judgments can have devastating consequences for defendants who fail to respond to lawsuits. However, New York law provides mechanisms for vacating these defaults under specific circumstances. One of the most commonly invoked provisions is CPLR 5015(a)(1), which allows courts to relieve parties from orders due to excusable default. But there’s a critical catch: the application must be made within one year of service of the order with notice of entry.
The case of Taveras v Philibert illustrates an important procedural requirement that many litigants overlook. When seeking relief under this statute, it’s not enough to simply demonstrate excusable default or a meritorious defense. The moving party must also prove they filed their motion within the statutory deadline. This burden of proof requirement can make or break a vacatur motion, regardless of how compelling the underlying circumstances may be.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Taveras v Philibert, 2013 NY Slip Op 04420 (1st Dept. 2013)
“The motion court properly denied plaintiffs’ CPLR 5015(a)(1) motion to vacate the prior order, granted on plaintiffs’ default. Under that statutory provision, a party seeking such relief must move to vacate the order within one year of service of the order with notice of entry (see Caba v Rai, 63 AD3d 578, 580 ). As the movant, it was plaintiffs’ burden to establish their right to the relief, including that their motion was timely made.”
The movant must establish that the application was made within the year. Seems simple enough?
Key Takeaway
The burden is always on the moving party to prove compliance with CPLR 5015(a)(1)‘s one-year deadline. Courts will not assume timeliness, and failure to meet procedural requirements can doom an otherwise valid motion. Practitioners must meticulously document when orders were served and ensure their clients understand these strict time limitations when considering default relief strategies.
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2013 post, there may have been amendments to CPLR 5015(a)(1) procedures, modifications to the one-year deadline requirements, or changes in how courts interpret the burden of proof standards for timeliness in vacatur motions. Practitioners should verify current CPLR provisions and recent case law developments before relying on the procedural requirements discussed in this post.
