Ordered the order is affirmed, with costs.
Although this Court has adopted a liberal policy with respect to vacating defaults in matrimonial actions, it is still within the Supreme Court's discretion to determine whether a default should be vacated ( see Passas v Passas, 18 AD3d 842; Viner v Viner, 291 AD2d 398; Black v Black, 141 AD2d 689). Here, the plaintiff failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his default in appearing at a pretrial conference ( see Rolston v Rolston, 261 AD2d 377; Benito v Childs, 253 AD2d 474). In light of the lack of a reasonable excuse, it is unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiff demonstrated a meritorious cause of action or defense to a counterclaim ( see Matter of Lutz v Goldstone, 31 AD3d 449, 450). Accordingly, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion to vacate the order entered upon the appellant's default.