Opinion
October 27, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.).
The court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the default since defendant failed to establish a meritorious defense (see, United Indus. Corp. v. Shreiber, 51 A.D.2d 688, 689, lv dismissed 39 N.Y.2d 1015, cert denied 429 U.S. 1023). The promissory note, drafted by defendant, was not usurious (General Obligations Law § 5-501), does not refer to any extrinsic condition and plaintiff presented proof of execution and the failure to make payments according to the note's terms (see, Hackensack Cars v. Beverly, 140 A.D.2d 254, lv dismissed 72 N.Y.2d 1041).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Kupferman, JJ.