Opinion
June 15, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Due to certain confusion surrounding the ad damnum clause and an alleged representation by the plaintiff's counsel that an amended complaint would be served, the defendant took no further action in this matter prior to the entry of a default judgment against it. Under the circumstances and in view of the absence of prejudice to the plaintiff, the meritorious nature of the defense, the lack of willfulness on the defendant's part and the public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits so that the expeditious disposal of cases does not become an end in itself, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in excusing the defendant's default (see, Heffney v Brookdale Hosp. Center, 102 A.D.2d 842, appeal dismissed 63 N.Y.2d 770; Stark v Marine Power Light Co., 99 A.D.2d 753; Lindo v Evans, 98 A.D.2d 765). Lawrence, J.P., Weinstein, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.