Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing defaults coverage, with 90 published articles analyzing defaults issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
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)
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
“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.
Related Articles
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
About This Topic
Default Judgments in New York Practice
Default judgments arise when a party fails to answer, appear, or respond within required time limits. Vacating a default under CPLR 5015 requires showing a reasonable excuse for the failure and a meritorious defense or cause of action. In no-fault practice, defaults occur frequently in arbitration and court proceedings, and the standards for granting and vacating defaults have generated substantial case law. These articles analyze default practice, restoration motions, and the circumstances under which courts excuse procedural failures.
90 published articles in Defaults
Keep Reading
More Defaults Analysis
Civil Court shenanigans
Unique Physical Rehab vacated a preclusion order entered during an appellate stay. The opinion distinguished inherent authority from jurisdictional relief.
Apr 24, 2021
Interest of justice vacatur
New York court grants vacatur of default judgment in no-fault insurance case where claim was barred by res judicata, demonstrating interests of justice standard.
Mar 17, 2021
Understanding Foundation Requirements in Medical Malpractice Expert Testimony
New York medical malpractice expert testimony foundation requirements.
Dec 28, 2008
Defaults
Court denies motion to vacate no-fault insurance default judgment where provider's attorney cited heavy workload as excuse, ruling mere neglect insufficient under CPLR 5015.
Nov 4, 2017
Entering judgment on a settlement – not what you thought
Court rules Kings County Clerk lacked authority to enter clerk's judgment on settlement stipulation requiring notice and unspecified amount under CPLR 3215(i)(1).
Aug 24, 2015
Shell game
City Dental distinguishes renewal, reargument and vacatur after late opposition. The separate CPLR 5015 request remained pending, not denied.
Apr 5, 2013Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a defaults matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
