Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to dismiss her former attorney's application for counsel fees. The motion was based on the claim that counsel had abandoned his application by failing to timely submit a judgment for signature within 60 days after the signing and filing of the court's decision awarding him counsel fees (see, Uniform Rules for Trial Cts [22 N.Y.CRR] § 202.48 [a]). The appellant failed to establish, however, that the 1991 Supreme Court decision was ever filed.
We further find that the grave illnesses suffered by counsel and his wife constituted good cause for his delay in submitting the judgment for signature after both the initial decision and the order entered August 6, 1993 (see, Uniform Rules for Trial Cts [22 N.Y.CRR] § 202.48 [b]). Balletta, J.P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.