Key Takeaway
Analysis of CPLR 3215(f) default judgment requirements in NY no-fault subrogation cases, examining procedural differences between Civil and District Courts.
Geico Ins. v Sullivan, 2017 NY Slip Op 27108 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2017)
This case highlights how disparate the uniform court system is. Here, Plaintiff clearly did not have sufficient facts to establish a default as to liability. I get that clearly, i.e., there was no affidavit or verification from the operator of the Subrogor’s vehicle. But I discuss this case because of what it does not say. Assume I filed the same subrogation case in Civil Queens and the defendant defaults. What do I do?
I file a Notice of Inquest with appropriate fees, put on the inquest calendar, bring whatever evidence of damages the assigned judge requires and knock out judgments and license suspensions. I sense that the District Court Clerk will require a motion for a default, refuses to engage in Civil Court practice and hence this case. That is why counsel here moved for leave to enter a default in the first instance.
Now it looks like the statute has run and Geico will never recover the $12,069.59. Brian Sullivan will keep his license and, yet, never knew how close he came to being in a lifetime payment plan or running to Central Islip to file a chapter 7
Related Articles
- A default that is more than meets the eyes
- Trial De Novo Default Judgment NY – No-Fault Insurance Requirements
- CPLR 5015(a)(1) in New York Personal Injury Cases: Setting Aside Default Judgments
- Affidavits of Non-Receipt and Default Judgment Procedures in NY Personal Injury Cases
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
