Key Takeaway
Castaldini ordered a new damages inquest after a physician's statement was admitted without cross-examination. Liability was not reopened.
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.
A default resolved liability in Castaldini, but it did not make the physician’s written statement immune from cross-examination. The Second Department ordered a new damages inquest after the statement was admitted without that opportunity.
Last reviewed: September 2026.
Still current (September 2026): CPLR 3215(b) still requires witness availability for cross-examination when the defaulting party gives reasonable notice that it will appear at the inquest.
What remained open at the inquest
In Castaldini v Walsh, 186 AD3d 1193 (2020), the defendant defaulted in answering a personal-injury complaint. At the damages inquest, he objected to a treating physician’s sworn statement because the physician was unavailable for cross-examination.
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 court rejected the attempt to reopen liability through a causation challenge at the inquest. But it agreed that admission of the physician’s statement over the objection was error. Because the damages findings relied on that statement, the remedy was a new inquest, not dismissal of the complaint or a new liability trial.
CPLR 3215(b) permits written proof in the circumstances it describes. When the defaulting party gives reasonable notice of appearing at the inquest, the statute requires witnesses supplying that proof to be available for cross-examination.
For this issue, the notice of appearance, proposed proof and opportunity to question the witness matter. Default does not by itself establish the amount of damages.
Jason’s original 2020 note
Jason’s original 2020 reaction:
This one is interesting.
Connect to the Encyclopedia
Start with the default judgments and law office failure guide.
- Josephson: proceedings after a calendar default
- Guccione: dismissal without a merits determination
- Pena-Vazquez: accepting an answer before judgment
- Pro-Med: an explanation unsupported by records
For review of a particular default or missed deadline, contact the office.
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
An intentional default excused based upon court’s inherent power to vacate defaults
Court's inherent power to vacate default judgments in NY personal injury cases - Gurin v Pogge demonstrates when intentional defaults may be excused for substantial justice.
Dec 8, 2013
Why Law Office Failure Excuses Must Be Detailed to Open Default Judgments in NY
Chechen rejected a vague excuse for missed conferences. Lamar allowed a late answer before judgment. The procedural difference matters as much as the result.
Dec 12, 2009
Where was the reasonable excuse?
Two NY court cases examine reasonable excuse requirements for opening defaults in no-fault insurance litigation, highlighting challenges defendants face.
Jul 21, 2018
Default – First Department reverses vacatur of the judgment
First Department reverses vacatur of default judgment due to insurer's inadequate excuse for two-year delay and lack of personal knowledge of office procedures.
Jun 27, 2016Was 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.
