ST. ROSE v. McMORROW

Ordered that the order dated September 8, 2006 is affirmed, with costs.

In order to vacate the order entered upon his default in opposing the motion, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious opposition to the motion for summary judgment ( see Oyebola v Makuch, 10 AD3d 600, 601; Itskovich v Lichenstadter, 2 AD3d 406, 407; Sicari v Hung Yuen Wong, 286 AD2d 489). The plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion.