The court properly exercised its discretion in dismissing this action on default when both parties failed to appear at a scheduled status conference in January 1993 ( see, Uniform Rules for Trial Cts [22 N.Y.CRR] § 202.27 [c]), and properly denied plaintiffs' March 1996 motion to vacate their default. Even were we to accept plaintiffs' contention that the standard for vacatur of a dismissal pursuant to CPLR 3404 should not be applied in this case, and apply instead the standard applicable to a vacatur sought under CPLR 5015 (a), we would conclude that the motion was properly denied since plaintiffs failed to make an adequate showing of merit ( see, Lake Claire Homeowners Assn. v. Rosenberg, 245 A.D.2d 427; see also, Alliance Prop. Mgt. Dev. v. Andrews Ave. Equities, 70 N.Y.2d 831) and that they had a reasonable excuse for failing to appear, especially considering their egregious non-compliance with a preliminary conference order directing them to file a note of issue by March 1991.
The order denying reargument is nonappealable. We have considered plaintiffs' other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
Comments