Defendants, as proponents of the motion to dismiss on grounds of forum non conveniens, failed to meet their burden to establish that a forum other than New York would be more convenient (see, Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474, 478-479, cert denied 469 U.S. 1108). Indeed, the relevant factors, including the presence in New York of an important New York City police officer witness, strongly militate in favor of resolving this action in New York rather than New Jersey, the alternative forum proposed by defendants (see, Brodherson v. V. Ponte Sons, 209 A.D.2d 276).
Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment was, however, properly denied since defendants demonstrated a reasonable excuse for their failure to serve a timely answer (see, CPLR 3012[d]). Contrary to plaintiffs' contention, under the circumstances presented, in which no default order or judgment was obtained against defendant, it was not necessary for defendants to serve an affidavit of merit in support of its motion to compel plaintiff to accept service of its answer (Mufalli v. Ford Motor Co., 105 A.D.2d 642, 644).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.