DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, and the action is restored to the trial calendar.
A party seeking to restore a case to the trial calendar after it has been dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3404 must demonstrate the merits of the case, a reasonable excuse for the delay, the absence of an intent to abandon the matter, and the lack of prejudice to the nonmoving party in the event the case is restored to the trial calendar (see, Peker v. Kaplan, 268 A.D.2d 572; [2d Dept., Jan. 31, 2000]; Aguilera v. 366 Hewes Street Assocs., L.P., 265 A.D.2d 436; Avila v. City of New York, 254 A.D.2d 383). Contrary to the Supreme Court's determination, the plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated these elements and is entitled to restoration (see, Ziegler v. City of New York, 266 A.D.2d 536 [2d Dept., Nov. 29, 1999]; Clayton-Garcia v. Moskin, 256 A.D.2d 299; Avila v. City of New York, supra).
RITTER, J.P., ALTMAN, KRAUSMAN, and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.