MATTER OF GAMBARDELLA v. Ortov Lighting, Inc.

• Decision Date: 26 December 2000
• Citation: 717 N.Y.S.2d 923,278 A.D.2d 494
• Parties: In the Matter of FRANK GAMBARDELLA et al., Respondents,<BR>v.<BR>ORTOV LIGHTING, INC., Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

278 A.D.2d 494

717 N.Y.S.2d 923

In the Matter of FRANK GAMBARDELLA et al., Respondents,

v.ORTOV LIGHTING, INC., Appellant.

Decided December 26, 2000.

Bracken, J.P., Santucci, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A party seeking to vacate a default must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious claim or defense (see, Parker v City of New York, 272 AD2d 310; Lovario v Vuotto, 266 AD2d 191; Wynne v Wagner, 262 AD2d 556). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse for a default lies within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, Parker v City of New York, supra). We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense to the proceeding. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion.