Attorneys from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Borrower’s Motion to Vacate a Money Judgment
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. responded to a motion to vacate a judgment by a borrower who had defaulted under the terms of several secured commercial notes.
The defendant borrower was a corporation and the defendant guarantor was the president of the corporation. In their motion, the defendants claimed they had repaid Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client and that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client was attempting to obtain hundreds of thousands of dollars to which it was not entitled. The defendants attempted to convince the court that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client took the amounts owed by withdrawing funds from accounts that the defendants held with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s bank client, and by foreclosing on a property in which the guarantor possessed an ownership interest. The motion also alleged that the defendants were never properly served in the action- they claimed that the guarantor/president’s wife failed to deliver the papers to him as a result of psychological problems from which she was suffering at the time.
Under New York Law, it is very well-settled that courts strongly prefer cases to be decided on the merits after all sides have had an opportunity to argue their positions. Thus, motions to vacate judgments when a defendant has failed to appear in the action and “have their day in court,” are regularly granted. Attorneys from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., knew that if the judgment were vacated, legal costs would increase and the client’s ability to collect the money that it was due might be jeopardized. While the motion was pending, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client was stayed from enforcing its judgment.
Accordingly, detailed and effective opposition papers were drafted eviscerating the excuse put forth by the defendants for failing to answer and challenging the evidentiary basis of the alleged failure by the guarantor/president’s wife to deliver the papers to him. Additionally, multiple affidavits were obtained from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client’s employees which elicited specific conversations demonstrating the defendants’ intent to purposefully default in this action. Further, the alleged “meritorious defense” presented by the defendants was also shown to be meritless by the overwhelming evidence presented showing that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client was never repaid through money from the defendants’ accounts or by turnover of real property.
The court agreed entirely with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s arguments, the motion to vacate was denied and the client was permitted to proceed with collection of the amounts due.
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. partner Colin Kaufman and an associate handled the opposition to the motion to vacate and oral argument.