Appellate Court Upholds Default Judgment in PR Firm’s Contract Dispute
In a sharply framed end‑of‑year ruling, a New York appellate panel has refused to reopen a default judgment entered against Fleet Financial Group, Inc., leaving intact a substantial win for Rubenstein Public Relations, Inc. in a long‑running contract dispute over unpaid invoices.
The conflict began in late 2022, when Rubenstein Public Relations sued Fleet Financial for allegedly failing to object to or pay a series of invoices for services rendered. As required, the PR firm served the summons and complaint on the New York Secretary of State and mailed a copy to Fleet’s business address. Fleet never responded. With no appearance from the defendant, the trial court granted a default judgment, and after an inquest, entered judgment against Fleet on October 30, 2023.
A full year passed before Fleet attempted to undo the damage. On October 30, 2024, the company moved to vacate the default and sought permission to file a late answer, complete with affirmative defenses and counterclaims. The trial court rejected the request, and Fleet appealed.
The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the lower court’s decision, finding that Fleet failed to meet the legal standards required to reopen a default. The panel noted that Rubenstein Public Relations had properly served the lawsuit through the Secretary of State, a method that constitutes valid service on a corporation. The firm also provided proof that it mailed an additional copy of the summons to Fleet’s last known address, satisfying the extra notice requirements for default judgments.
Fleet’s attempt to challenge service fell flat. The court found no evidence that the company had been deprived of notice, and no basis to conclude that service was improper. But even if Fleet had cleared that hurdle, the judges emphasized that the company still failed to present a meaningful defense to the underlying claims.
According to the decision, the affidavit submitted by Fleet’s president offered only vague, conclusory statements about potential defenses—nowhere near the detailed, fact‑based showing required to reopen a default judgment. Without a credible explanation for the failure to appear, and without a substantive defense to the PR firm’s claims, Fleet’s motion could not stand.
Because Fleet failed to meet these threshold requirements, the appellate court declined to consider whether the company had a reasonable excuse for its year‑long delay.
The ruling leaves Rubenstein Public Relations’ judgment fully intact and underscores the courts’ consistent message: corporations that ignore properly served lawsuits do so at their own peril.
(Just goes to show you .... A fleeting defense, is not defense at all ....)
# # #
DECISION