Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Although a motion to renew is generally based upon the discovery of material facts which were unknown to the movant at the time of the original motion ( see, Chiarella v. Quitoni, 178 A.D.2d 502), it is well settled that "[t]he requirement * * * is a flexible one, and a court, in its discretion, may grant renewal upon facts known to the moving party at the time of the original motion" ( Karlin v. Bridges, 172 A.D.2d 644, 646; CPLR 2221).
The evidence presented by the defendant Ace Contracting, Inc. (hereinafter Ace), upon renewal established a reasonable excuse for its default in answering the complaint and a meritorious defense ( see, Putney v. Pearlman, 203 A.D.2d 333). Accordingly, under the circumstances, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting Ace's motion for renewal, and, upon renewal, denying the plaintiffs' motion for leave to enter a default judgment against Ace.
Rosenblatt, J.P., O'Brien, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.