NURSE v. FIGEROUX

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In order to prevail on their motion to vacate, the defendants were required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for their default and a meritorious defense ( see Hospital for Joint Diseases v Dollar Rent A Car, 25 AD3d 534; Fekete v Camp Skwere, 16 AD3d 544, 545). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the trial court's discretion ( see Santiago v New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 10 AD3d 393, 394; Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568, 569). Although the court has the discretion to accept law office failure as a reasonable excuse ( see CPLR 2005) the defendants' conclusory, undetailed, and uncorroborated claim of law office failure in this case did not amount to a reasonable excuse ( see Matter of ELRAC, Inc. v Holder, 31 AD3d 636; McClaren v Bell Atl., 30 AD3d 569; Matter of Denton v City of Mount Vernon, 30 AD3d 600, 601; Grezinsky v Mount Hebron Cemetery, 305 AD2d 542). Moreover, the defendants made no attempt to demonstrate that they had a meritorious defense to the action.