DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the orders are affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants.
As a result of the plaintiff's failure to fully and timely comply with a conditional order of dismissal dated June 6, 2001, that conditional order became absolute (see Jenkinson v. Naccarato, 286 A.D.2d 420; Steward v. City of New York, 266 A.D.2d 452). To avoid the adverse impact of the conditional order, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate an excusable default and the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see Jenkinson v. Naccarato, supra; Mann v. Dachel, 210 A.D.2d 461, 462). He failed to do so and, therefore, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to renew (see Wechsler v. First Unum Life Ins. Co., 295 A.D.2d 340, 342; CPLR 2221[e][2], [3]).
ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.