PIZARRO v. EVERGREEN ESTATES HOUS

Plaintiff fails to show a reasonable excuse for the default that led to the Clerk's dismissal of the action ( 22 NYCRR 202.21[f]; see Alvarado v. 1824 Weeks Ave. Equities, 305 A.D.2d 118). It appears that personal appearances were not required at the Clerk's calendar call in question, and that instead the Clerk was to be advised of the status of the action through the submission of a written form. Plaintiff's attorney asserts that his office completed the form and returned it to the court in timely fashion through its lawyers' service. However, he submits no documentary evidence showing that the form was either received by the lawyers' service or delivered to the court. Plaintiff's motion to renew and reargue raised no new facts and is therefore properly viewed as one for reargument only, the denial of which is not appealable ( see Lichtman v. Mount Judah Cemetery, 269 A.D.2d 319, 320, lv denied in part and dismissed in part 95 N.Y.2d 860).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.