Firm Update No. 2024-05本所动态 2024-05 号
In re Unpaid Referral Commissions Against an Online Small-Business Lender: Default Judgment, Then a Confidential Settlement诉网络小企业贷款平台拖欠转介佣金案：先获缺席判决，后达成保密和解
- Practice领域
- Civil Litigation民事诉讼
- Jurisdiction管辖
- Supreme Court, New York County (Commercial); JAMS纽约州最高法院纽约县分院（商事）；JAMS仲裁
- Our role本所角色
- Counsel to the plaintiff原告律师
- Status进展
- Confidential settlement; discontinued with prejudice May 2024保密和解；2024年5月附既判效力撤案
IFacts事实
The client, a New York company that refers small businesses to financing sources, sent loan applicants to an online small-business lending platform and its affiliated lender under a referral arrangement that paid commissions on funded loans. When commissions on funded referrals went unpaid, the firm commenced a commercial contract action in Supreme Court, New York County, in early 2023 against the platform and its affiliates.客户是一家纽约公司，业务是为小企业对接融资渠道。客户依据一项按已放款贷款支付佣金的转介安排，将贷款申请人转介给一家网络小企业贷款平台及其关联放贷机构。已放款转介的佣金未获支付后，本所于2023年初在纽约州最高法院纽约县分院对该平台及其关联公司提起商事合同诉讼。
The defendants did not answer. The firm moved for a default judgment in May 2023, and the court decided the motion on June 9, 2023. The defendants then moved to vacate. That motion was withdrawn on July 7, 2023, and the dispute proceeded before JAMS.被告未答辩。本所于2023年5月申请缺席判决，法院于2023年6月9日就该动议作出裁定。被告随后申请撤销。该动议于2023年7月7日撤回，争议转由JAMS处理。
IIQuestions Presented争议问题
(1) What must a plaintiff submit to obtain a default judgment on a commercial contract claim? (2) What must a defaulting defendant show to set the judgment aside, and how does that burden shape the negotiation that follows?（一）原告就商事合同请求申请缺席判决，须提交哪些材料？（二）缺席被告须证明什么才能撤销判决？这一举证责任如何影响随后的谈判？
IIIRelevant Law相关法律
CPLR 3215(a), (f): default judgment; proof of service; proof of the facts constituting the claim; proof of defaultCPLR 3215(a), (f)：缺席判决；送达证明；诉讼请求事实证明；缺席证明
Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62 (2003): viable cause of action; prima facie showing; non-stringent standard of proofWoodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62 (2003)：可成立的诉因；初步证明；宽松证明标准
CPLR 5015(a)(1): vacatur of default judgment; excusable defaultCPLR 5015(a)(1)：撤销缺席判决；可宽宥的缺席
Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v. A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138 (1986): reasonable excuse; meritorious defense; corporate defaultEugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v. A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138 (1986)：合理理由；实质性抗辩；公司缺席
Harris v. Seward Park Hous. Corp., 79 A.D.3d 425 (1st Dep't 2010): elements of breach of contract; plaintiff's performance; damagesHarris v. Seward Park Hous. Corp., 79 A.D.3d 425 (1st Dep't 2010)：违约构成要件；原告履约；损害赔偿
IVDisposition结果
The parties executed a confidential settlement agreement in April 2024, the settlement was paid, and the proceeding was discontinued with prejudice in May 2024.双方于2024年4月签署保密和解协议，和解款项已支付，程序于2024年5月附既判效力撤案。
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。