ASTORIA FED. v. HARTRIDGE

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In the exercise of its equitable powers, a court has the discretion to set aside a foreclosure sale where there is evidence of fraud, collusion, mistake, or misconduct ( see Guardian Loan Co. v Early, 47 NY2d 515, 521; Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y. v Zapala, 255 AD2d 547, 548; Provident Sav. Bank v Bordes, 244 AD2d 470). "Absent such conduct, the mere inadequacy of price is an insufficient reason to set aside a sale unless the price is so inadequate as to shock the court's conscience" ( Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y. v Zapala, 255 AD2d at 548; see Bankers Fed. Sav. Loan Assn. v House, 182 AD2d 602). Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in setting aside the foreclosure sale on the ground that the sale price was unconscionably low ( see Pisano v Tupper, 188 AD2d 991, 993).

The appellant's remaining contention is without merit.