Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Initially we note that, contrary to the plaintiff's assertion, an order granting reargument but adhering to the original determination is appealable (see, Dennis v Stout, 24 A.D.2d 461; Council Commerce Corp. v Paschalides, 92 A.D.2d 579).
A party attempting to vacate a default judgment on the ground of excusable default (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]) must establish both that there is a reasonable excuse for the default and that there exists a meritorious defense (see, Schultz v Ruggiero, 129 A.D.2d 573; Siegel, N Y Prac § 108). The defendant contends that there was an excusable default, i.e., she never received the summons and complaint, and a meritorious defense, i.e., res judicata. However, the record shows that the defendant was personally served with the summons and complaint at the correctional institution where she is confined. Furthermore, with regard to the merits, the instant ejectment action was not barred under the doctrine of res judicata by the prior dismissal of the plaintiff's summary holdover proceeding (see, Modell Co. v Minister, Elders Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church, 68 N.Y.2d 456, rearg denied 69 N.Y.2d 741; Walsh v Somerville, 75 A.D.2d 511; Health Beauty Studios v Gray, 48 A.D.2d 632, appeal dismissed 36 N.Y.2d 938; RPAPL 747). Mollen, P.J., Kunzeman, Rubin and Balletta, JJ., concur.