DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motions are denied, the complaint is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings on the merits.
In order to successfully oppose a motion for leave to enter a default judgment based upon the plaintiff's failure to serve a reply to a counterclaim, a plaintiff must establish a reasonable excuse for the delay and demonstrate a meritorious defense ( see Bensimon v. Fishman, 242 A.D.2d 551). It is generally left to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court to determine what constitutes a reasonable excuse ( see Scarlett v. McCarthy, 2 A.D.3d 623) and a meritorious defense ( see Fidelity Deposit Co. of Md. v. Andersen Co. 60 N.Y.2d 693, 695). Here, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting leave to the defendants to enter a default judgment in the face of the plaintiff's opposition.
The plaintiff proffered an excuse of law office failure ( see CPLR 2005) and referenced her verified complaint to demonstrate a meritorious defense ( see CPLR 105[u]; Salch v. Paratore, 60 N.Y.2d 851; Matter of Ajamian, 225 A.D.2d 992). Where, as here, there is no evidence of willfulness, deliberate default, or prejudice to the defendants, the interest of justice is best served by permitting the case to be decided on its merits ( see Photovision Intl. v. Thayer, 235 A.D.2d 467; Matter of Ajamian, supra).
Furthermore, since neither CPLR 8303-a nor 22 NYCRR 130.1 provide an independent basis to dismiss a complaint, the Supreme Court erred in granting this relief. Accordingly, we reinstate the complaint.
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and MASTRO, JJ., concur.