Court Opinion

ID: 5842402
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 23:30:00.070898+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:48.957383
License: Public Domain

Defendants moved pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate the order striking their answer. A party seeking such relief must establish a reasonable excuse for its underlying default as well as a meritorious defense (see Ogen v Nordstrom, 85 AD3d 552 [2011]). Defendants’ purported showing of a meritorious defense was insufficient because it was based on the affirmation of an attorney who had no personal knowledge of the facts alleged (see Thelen LLP v Omni Contr. Co., Inc., 79 AD3d 605, 606 [2010], lv denied 17 NY3d 713 [2011]). Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Acosta and DeGrasse, JJ.