Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion for renewal is granted, upon renewal, the order dated August 20, 1996, is vacated, and the plaintiff's motion to restore the action to the trial calendar is granted.
By order dated August 20, 1996, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's motion to restore the case to the trial calendar for failure to submit, inter alia, an affidavit of merit. The plaintiff's appeal from that order was dismissed for failure to timely perfect. The dismissal of that appeal precludes review of the issue raised on this appeal regarding the propriety of the court's ruling that an affidavit of merit and certain other submissions were required under the circumstances of this case ( see, Bray v. Cox, 38 N.Y.2d 350).
However, because the plaintiff had a valid excuse for failing to submit the affidavit and other information on his original motion, the court should have exercised its discretion and granted the plaintiff's subsequent motion, which was, in effect, for renewal of the prior motion to restore the action to the trial calendar ( see, Hantz v. Fishman, 155 A.D.2d 415; Oremland v. Miller Minutemen Constr. Corp., 133 A.D.2d 816). Upon renewal, the court should have granted the plaintiff's motion to restore the case to the calendar inasmuch as his additional affidavit and submissions satisfied the court's requirements.
Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.