Practice point: The Appellate Division found that the Supreme Court erred in accepting an untimely, pro se answer from the
defendant corporation, and in thereby denying that branch of the
plaintiff's motion which was for leave to enter a default judgment on
the complaint. The proffered answer was a nullity as a corporation
must be represented by an attorney and cannot proceed pro se, pursuant to CPLR 321[a].
Student note: The Appellate Division also found that, as the plaintiff's submissions on the motion established each of the claims prima facie,
that branch of the motion which was for leave to enter a default
judgment should have been granted.
Case: Boente v. Peter C. Kurth Off. of Architecture & Planning, P.C., NY Slip Op 00473 (2d Dept. 2014).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: The statutory pleading requirement for fraud.
