Key Takeaway
New York court ruling shows how defendants can waive jurisdictional defenses through conduct, even when challenging court jurisdiction years later.
Understanding How Jurisdictional Defenses Can Be Waived Through Defendant Conduct
In New York civil litigation, defendants often attempt to challenge a court’s jurisdiction over them as a defense strategy. However, courts have consistently held that certain actions by defendants can waive these jurisdictional challenges, even when the defendant later claims the court lacked authority to enter judgment. A recent appellate decision demonstrates how seemingly innocent communications with opposing counsel can destroy an otherwise valid jurisdictional defense.
The concept of waiver in jurisdictional matters is particularly significant because it shows how defendants’ own conduct can undermine their legal position. Unlike other defenses that must be explicitly abandoned, jurisdictional defenses can be waived through implicit acknowledgment of the court’s authority or through unreasonable delays in asserting the defense.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v Davis, 2020 NY Slip Op 51008(U)(App. Term 2d Dept, 2020)
“Nevertheless, a lack of jurisdiction claim will be deemed waived where a defendant has implicitly acknowledged the validity of a default judgment or has unreasonably delayed in moving to vacate the judgment (see Cadlerock Joint Venture, L.P. v Kierstedt, 119 AD3d 627, 628 ; Taveras v City of New York, 108 AD3d 614, 617 ; HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v A & R Trucking Co., Inc., 66 AD3d 606 ). Here, it is undisputed that seven years before moving to vacate the judgment, defendant had called plaintiff’s attorney’s office in order to negotiate payment of the judgment. Defendant thereby implicitly acknowledged the existence of the judgment and demonstrated a lack of good faith by dilatorily asserting his rights.”
Key Takeaway
This case illustrates that defendants cannot have it both ways — they cannot negotiate payment of a judgment while simultaneously claiming the court lacked jurisdiction to enter that judgment. The seven-year delay between the defendant’s acknowledgment and the motion to vacate demonstrated bad faith and resulted in waiver of the jurisdictional defense. This principle applies broadly beyond jurisdictional defects to various procedural challenges in New York courts.
