Matter of Diamonds R-Us Ltd. v. Rafaello & Co. Inc.

Matter of Diamonds R-Us Ltd. v Rafaello & Co. Inc. (2025 NY Slip Op 03245) Matter of Diamonds R-Us Ltd. v Rafaello & Co. Inc. 2025 NY Slip Op 03245 Decided on May 29, 2025 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided and Entered: May 29, 2025 Before: Moulton, J.P., Friedman, Scarpulla, O'Neill Levy, Michael, JJ. Index No. 650678/24|Appeal No. 4459|Case No. 2024-05411| [*1]In the Matter of Diamonds R-Us Ltd., Petitioner-Respondent, v Rafaello & Company Inc., et al., Respondents-Appellants, Gabriel Nektalov Also Known as Yaakov J. Nektalov, Respondent. Pierce & Kwok LLP, New York (Aaron H. Pierce of counsel), for appellants. Altschul & Altschul, New York (Mark M. Altschul of counsel), for respondent. Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eric Schumacher, J.), entered on or about July 25, 2024, which, to the extent appealed from, granted petitioner's petition to confirm the arbitration award rendered in petitioner's favor as against respondents-appellants Rafaello & Company Inc. and Rafael Khay also known as Rafaelkhay Aranbayev, unanimously dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from the July 25, 2024 order, as it was entered on default after appellants failed to submit opposition to petitioner's motion to confirm the arbitration award (see CPLR 5511; see e.g. Figiel v Met Food, 48 AD3d 330, 330 [1st Dept 2008]). Appellants' proper remedy is to move to vacate their default before the Justice who entered the default in Supreme Court, and, if that motion is denied, to appeal from the order denying the motion to vacate (see Figiel, 48 AD3d at 330). We have considered appellants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT. ENTERED: May 29, 2025