Associates First Capital v. Crabill

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Third Department, held that the trial court should not have treated defendants’ opposition papers as waived solely because they were served less than seven days before the return date, where the delay was minimal, explained, and nonprejudicial. The court nevertheless affirmed summary judgment dismissing the defendants’ intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress counterclaim because the alleged mortgage-collection conduct did not meet the stringent outrageousness requirement.

Holdings

1. Supreme Court erred in treating plaintiff's motion as unopposed and granting summary judgment solely because defendants' opposition papers were untimely, where the delay was less than one week, defendants supplied a detailed excuse, plaintiff showed no prejudice, and plaintiff used the additional time to submit a substantial reply.
2. Summary judgment dismissing defendants' intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress counterclaim was proper because the alleged collection conduct, including foreclosure threats, embarrassing workplace calls, disputed statements about the debt, and resulting stress, did not constitute conduct sufficiently outrageous to satisfy the claim's rigorous standard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Supreme Court abused its discretion by refusing to consider defendants' opposition papers served less than seven days before the return date.
2. Whether defendants' evidence raised a triable issue of fact on their intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress counterclaim.

Disposition

affirmed