Firm Update No. 2026-07本所动态 2026-07 号
Pending: Reviving a Lost Default Case After Judgment, Reinstating a Dismissed Appeal and Arguing It in the Appellate Division审理中：判决后接手已败诉的缺席案件，恢复被视为撤回的上诉并在上诉法院辩论
- Practice领域
- Civil Litigation民事诉讼
- Jurisdiction管辖
- Appellate Division, Second Department; Supreme Court, Westchester County纽约州上诉法院第二司法部；纽约州最高法院威彻斯特县分院
- Our role本所角色
- Counsel to the defendants-appellants (retained after judgment)被告兼上诉人律师（判决后受托）
- Status进展
- Pending; appeal reinstated May 2025 and argued Apr. 24, 2026; awaiting decision审理中；上诉于2025年5月恢复，2026年4月24日已言词辩论；待判决
IFacts事实
A former employee sued a small business and its owner for unpaid wages. Under prior counsel the defendants defaulted: the court granted a default on liability in November 2022, held the damages inquest without them in May 2023, and entered judgment of about $117,000 in June 2023. The owner, who does not read English, retained Xu Law Offices in July 2023, after judgment. Plaintiff's counsel refused to settle and threatened collection.一名前员工起诉一家小企业及其业主追讨欠薪。在原律师代理期间，被告缺席：法院于2022年11月就责任作出缺席裁定，2023年5月在被告缺席下进行损害赔偿听证，并于2023年6月作出约117,000美元的判决。不懂英文的业主在判决后于2023年7月委托本所。原告律师拒绝和解，并威胁强制执行。
IIPleadings诉辩文书
Complaint. Unpaid wages and related statutory claims against the company and its owner.起诉状。针对公司及其业主的欠薪及相关法定请求。
Defendants' position. No answer was on file when the firm came in. The defendants deny the debt, swear that they never received process, and say the employee was paid, including amounts beyond what was owed.被告立场。本所接手时并无答辩状在卷。被告否认欠款，宣誓从未收到传票，并称已向该员工付清工资，甚至有超付。
IIIMotions and Court Orders动议及法院裁定
Motion to renew, reargue and vacate (November 3, 2023). The firm moved under CPLR 2221 and 5015(a)(1), (3) and (4): no valid service; an excusable default caused by prior counsel's failure (CPLR 2005); the plaintiff's delay of more than a year in seeking the default (CPLR 3215(c)); and that disputed wage damages are not a sum certain. Denied January 23, 2024.重审、重新辩论及撤销动议（2023年11月3日）。本所依CPLR第2221条及第5015(a)(1)、(3)、(4)条提出：送达无效；因原律师失误导致的可宥恕缺席（CPLR第2005条）；原告迟延逾一年才申请缺席判决（CPLR第3215(c)条）；以及有争议的工资损害并非确定金额。2024年1月23日被驳回。
Plaintiff's motion for additional attorney's fees. The firm opposed, and the court denied the request on March 26, 2024.原告申请额外律师费的动议。本所提出反对，法院于2024年3月26日驳回该请求。
Notice of appeal and extension (2024). The firm appealed to the Appellate Division, Second Department, and obtained an extension of time to perfect to November 14, 2024.上诉通知及延期（2024年）。本所向上诉法院第二司法部提起上诉，并获准将完成上诉的期限延至2024年11月14日。
Dismissal and reinstatement (2025). After filing problems with the record, the appeal was deemed dismissed on March 7, 2025. The firm moved to vacate the dismissal under 22 NYCRR 1250.10(c), showing good cause and a meritorious appeal. Over plaintiff's opposition, the court reinstated the appeal on May 23, 2025.撤回及恢复（2025年）。因卷宗提交问题，上诉于2025年3月7日被视为撤回。本所依22 NYCRR 1250.10(c)申请撤销该撤回，证明有正当理由且上诉有理。法院不顾原告反对，于2025年5月23日恢复上诉。
Record motions (2025). The plaintiff moved to strike a payment record that was not before the trial court; the firm cross-moved to have it accepted. On November 14, 2025 the court struck the document and denied the cross-motion, and the firm filed a replacement brief limited to the record.卷宗动议（2025年）。原告申请删除一份未在初审法院提交的付款记录；本所交叉申请接纳该记录。法院于2025年11月14日删除该文件并驳回交叉动议，本所随即提交仅依卷宗的替换理由书。
Briefing and argument (2025 to 2026). The appellants' brief was filed December 16, 2025, the respondent's brief January 15, 2026, and the reply January 20, 2026. The appeal was argued on April 24, 2026.书状及辩论（2025至2026年）。上诉人理由书于2025年12月16日提交，被上诉人理由书于2026年1月15日提交，答辩理由书于2026年1月20日提交。上诉于2026年4月24日进行言词辩论。
IVQuestions Presented争议问题
(1) Can a judgment entered on default stand where the defendants swear they were never served and no traverse hearing was held? (2) Are disputed wage damages a sum certain? (3) Should a default caused by prior counsel's failure be excused in favor of a decision on the merits?（1）被告宣誓从未被送达且未举行送达争议听证，缺席判决能否成立？（2）有争议的工资损害是否属于确定金额？（3）因原律师失误造成的缺席，是否应予宽宥，以便就实体作出裁决？
VRelevant Law相关法律
CPLR 5015(a)(1), (a)(4): excusable default; reasonable excuse; meritorious defense; lack of personal jurisdictionCPLR 5015(a)(1), (a)(4)：可宽宥的缺席；合理理由；有理抗辩；缺乏属人管辖权
CPLR 2005, 2221: law office failure; motion to renew; motion to reargueCPLR 2005, 2221：律所过失；重新审理动议；重新辩论动议
CPLR 3215(a), (c): clerk's judgment; sum certain; abandonment of defaultCPLR 3215(a), (c)：书记官判决；确定金额；缺席判决申请的放弃
Reynolds Sec., Inc. v. Underwriters Bank & Trust Co., 44 N.Y.2d 568 (1978): sum certain; clerk's default judgment; liquidated claimReynolds Sec., Inc. v. Underwriters Bank & Trust Co., 44 N.Y.2d 568 (1978)：确定金额；书记官缺席判决；已确定金额的请求
Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62 (2003): default judgment; proof of facts constituting the claim; viable cause of action; preference for merits resolutionWoodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62 (2003)：缺席判决；构成请求的事实证明；可成立的诉因；实体审理优先
Royal Zenith Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co., 63 N.Y.2d 975 (1984): void judgment; jurisdictional defect; sworn denial of service; traverse hearingRoyal Zenith Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co., 63 N.Y.2d 975 (1984)：无效判决；管辖瑕疵；宣誓否认送达；送达争议听证
22 NYCRR 1250.10(c): dismissed appeal; reinstatement; good cause22 NYCRR 1250.10(c)：被驳回的上诉；恢复上诉；正当理由
VICurrent Stage当前阶段
The appeal was argued on April 24, 2026 and is awaiting decision. The defendants ask the court to reverse and vacate the judgment, or in the alternative to remand for a traverse hearing and a new inquest on damages.上诉已于2026年4月24日辩论，待判决。被告请求法院撤销原判并撤销判决，或替代性地发回举行送达争议听证并重新审理损害赔偿。
Client details are withheld to protect confidentiality. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.为保护客户隐私，相关信息已隐去。过往结果不保证类似案件的结果。