DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.
On April 14, 2000, the appellant moved to vacate a judgment entered against him in a mortgage foreclosure action five years earlier on the ground that he was not served with the summons and complaint. The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion. The appellant was not entitled to vacate the judgment on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction since his attorney appeared on his behalf in 1989 and subsequently waived the jurisdictional defense asserted in the answer ( see, Yihye v. Blumenberg, 260 A.D.2d 371; Morrison v. Budget Rent A Car Sys., 230 A.D.2d 253, 260; Matter of Durchin, 217 A.D.2d 582). Moreover, the appellant failed to establish that he had a meritorious defense to the action ( see, W.H. Linen Supply Co. v. Landing Steak House, Inc., 286 A.D.2d 326 [2d Dept., Aug. 6, 2001]; Hecht v. Bass Rest., 267 A.D.2d 279).
The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion for leave to renew since he failed to present a reasonable justification for not presenting the additional facts in his original motion ( see, CPLR 2221[e][3]; Greene v. New York City Hous. Auth., 283 A.D.2d 458; Tummina v. Royal Carting Servs., 282 A.D.2d 670; Cooke v. Cekovic, 282 A.D.2d 568).
O'BRIEN, J.P., McGINITY, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.