Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the defendant Dr. Donovan's motion to vacate his default in answering is denied.
The record indicates that even though properly served, Dr. Donovan neglected to answer the amended complaint and failed to answer two subsequent motions by the plaintiff for leave to enter a default judgment. In addition, Dr. Donovan ignored certified mail sent to him by the plaintiff advising him of the service of process and that a motion for leave to enter a default judgment was pending. This repeated neglect of legal process, which took place over a time span of more than a year, was based solely on Dr. Donovan's unsubstantiated claim that the plaintiff's action caused him "severe emotional and psychological problems". Under these circumstances, the granting of Dr. Donovan's motion to vacate his default in answering constituted an abuse of discretion as a matter of law (see, Burks v. Weiss, 137 A.D.2d 646; De Leo v. Bertucci, 98 A.D.2d 708; Amity Plumbing Heating Supply Corp. v. Zito Plumbing Heating Corp., 110 A.D.2d 863; Zaldua v. Metropolitan Suburban Bus Auth., 97 A.D.2d 842). Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Sullivan, JJ., concur.