Actions - Stay - Entry of Judgment Violated Automatic Stay in Effect after Suspension of Counsel

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Marissa Soto, J.), entered April 2, 2024, awarding a money judgment in plaintiffs' favor against defendants, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the judgment vacated.

Although the issue was raised for the first time in defendants' reply brief, we may consider whether the entry of the judgment violated an automatic stay pursuant to CPLR 321 (c) (see Moray v Koven & Krause, Esqs., 15 NY3d 384, 390 [2010]).

Defendants' prior counsel was suspended on June 29, 2023 (Matter of Gross, 217 AD3d 18, 20 [1st Dept 2023]), triggering an automatic stay under CPLR 321 (c). There is no indication in the record that plaintiffs served a 30-day notice or obtained leave to proceed pursuant to CPLR 321 (c). Moreover, defendants did not retain new counsel until May 3, 2024. Accordingly, the automatic stay remained in effect when the judgment was entered on April 2, 2024. A judgment entered during such a stay must be vacated (Duandre Corp. v Golden Krust Caribbean Bakery & Grill, 140 AD3d 481 [1st Dept 2016]).

Since we are vacating the judgment, we do not consider the parties' remaining disputes, including whether defendants' appeal from the judgment brings up for review the court's order entered January 5, 2023. Concur—Kern, J.P., González, Rodriguez, Pitt-Burke, Higgitt, JJ.