Court Opinion

ID: 6043812
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 14:07:00.955575+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:51:27.846243
License: Public Domain

Cardona, P. J.
(dissenting). We respectfully dissent. In our view, the excuse offered by third-party defendant D.A. Bennett, Inc. is akin to a party’s failure to comprehend the urgency of responding to a complaint, which does not constitute a reasonable excuse (see, Pagano v U.W. Marx, Inc., 223 AD2d 817). Bennett’s demonstration of a potentially meritorious defense is irrelevant (see, id., at 818). Since Supreme Court’s exercise of discretion finds support in the record, we should not disturb it (see, Northeastern Harness Horsemen’s Assn, v Saratoga Harness Racing, 216 AD2d 746, 747).
Mercure, J., concurs.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, cross motion denied and motion granted.