Cadim Stonehenge 56th Assoc., LLC v 57 Dry Clean Inc.

Annotate this Case
Cadim Stonehenge 56th Assoc., LLC v 57 Dry Clean Inc. 2010 NY Slip Op 07711 [77 AD3d 876] October 26, 2010 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Cadim Stonehenge 56th Associates, LLC, Respondent,
v
57 Dry Clean Inc., Doing Business as Lucky Cleaners, et al., Appellants.

—[*1] Robert N. Lerner, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellants.

Kossoff & Unger, New York, N.Y. (Joseph Goldsmith of counsel), for respondent.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a lease, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated September 23, 2009, which denied their motion to vacate a judgment of the same court dated April 2, 2009, in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the total sum of $109,294.02, entered upon their default in filing opposition to the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the facts and as an exercise of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof denying that branch of the defendants' motion which was to vacate so much of the judgment as was in favor of the plaintiff and against the individual defendant, Hong Jian Liu, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The individual defendant, Hong Jian Liu, demonstrated a reasonable excuse for his default and a potentially meritorious defense (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Martins v Yukhayev, 63 AD3d 697, 698 [2009]). Accordingly, that branch of the defendants' motion which was to vacate so much of the judgment as was in favor of the plaintiff and against the individual defendant should be granted.

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit. Dillon, J.P., Florio, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.