June 24, 2026

Default judgments

Defendant failed to establish that the judgment, which was entered after defendant's default, was secured by extrinsic fraud. Regardless of the validity of his allegation that plaintiff concealed from him the scheduling of two court conferences, that information was available to defendant through e-courts, to which defendant previously admitted having access. Nor does defendant's contention that plaintiff engaged in intrinsic fraud by misrepresenting the scope of its work in the underlying action compel vacatur of the judgment because defendant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for his default and has not demonstrated a meritorious defense since the record reflects that, contrary to his contentions, plaintiff did not misrepresent the work it performed on his behalf in the underlying action.

Dunnington Bartholow & Miller, LLP v. Simon,, NY Slip Op 03878 (1st Dep't June 18, 2026)

Here is the decision.