Defendant has supplied no documentary evidence to support his claim that plaintiff gave him a written estimate of the cost of legal services that was substantially less than the amount for which plaintiff recovered judgment (cf. Herrick Feinstein, LLP v. Stamm, 297 A.D.2d 477). Therefore, defendant has failed to make the necessary showing that he has a meritorious defense to the action to support vacating the default judgment (CPLR 5015[a][1]; see Mediavilla v. Gurman, 272 A.D.2d 146, 148; Hunter v. Enquirer/Star, Inc., 210 A.D.2d 32, 33). Even if a meritorious defense could be discerned, defendant has failed to proffer any excuse for the untimely service of his answer and, in the absence of a reasonable excuse for the delay, the denial of defendant's motion was a provident exercise of discretion (Gerlin v. J. Homann Trucking, 303 A.D.2d 262).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.