MELISH v. MELISH

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Dec 6, 1999

Judgment

CaseIQ

Important Paras

Please sign up to view Important Paras.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On his motion to vacate his default, the defendant was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and a meritorious defense to the underlying motion ( see, Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis, 238 A.D.2d 568; Fennell v. Mason, 204 A.D.2d 599). The Supreme Court properly denied the motion, as the defendant's affidavit of merit, which contained only conclusory assertions, was insufficient to establish a meritorious defense to the underlying motion ( see, Peterson v. Scandurra Trucking Co., 226 A.D.2d 691; Lener v. Club Med, 168 A.D.2d 433; Starr Block Co. v. Tedesco, 146 A.D.2d 692).

O'BRIEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, GOLDSTEIN, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.