SIPPIN v. GALLARDO

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 3215(a) for leave to enter a judgment against the defendants upon their failure to appear or answer and granting the defendants' cross motion pursuant to CPLR 3012(d) for an extension of time to answer (see, Dowson v. Forest Park Assn. of Greenwood Lake, N.Y., 228 A.D.2d 471). Public policy favors the resolution of cases on the merits, and in this case there a relatively short period of delay, a possible meritorious defense, no claim of prejudice to the plaintiffs, and no willfulness by the defendants.

KRAUSMAN, J.P., LUCIANO, SMITH and ADAMS, JJ., concur.