Weiss, P.J.
Plaintiff appeals an award of counsel fees and costs set by Supreme Court at $10,000 pursuant to CPLR 8303-a. The facts are reported in this Court's prior decision ( 164 A.D.2d 476, lv dismissed 77 N.Y.2d 940).
Plaintiff contends that he was denied due process when he was denied a full evidentiary hearing to calculate the amount of the award. We find a formal evidentiary hearing unnecessary where, as here, on notice of motion plaintiff had the opportunity to review defendant's application and had the opportunity to be heard on the motion. In an analogous situation, the Court of Appeals imposed sanctions where the opposing party had express notice of the pending application (Matter of Minister, Elders Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 76 N.Y.2d 411, 413, n; see also, Dellafiora v Dellafiora, 172 A.D.2d 715; Harley v Druzba, 169 A.D.2d 1001, 1002-1003).
Plaintiff next contends that Supreme Court inappropriately considered the time defendant's counsel expended in pursuit of having counsel fees awarded. Contrary to plaintiff's assertion, the fees and costs associated with the preparation of defendant's appeal of the denial of his application for sanctions were appropriately considered by Supreme Court, particularly because plaintiff was appealing the original dismissal of his frivolous action (see, Patane v Griffin, 164 A.D.2d 192, 197-198, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 810).
As a final note and contrary to defendant's argument, this Court was not deprived of jurisdiction by plaintiff's unsuccessful motion for leave to appeal the subject order directly to the Court of Appeals ( 78 N.Y.2d 855; see, e.g., City of New York v 60 W. 119 Corp., 62 N.Y.2d 799; Gould v Furbish, 61 N.Y.2d 832).
Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.