Opinion
March 25, 2008.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy Friedman, J.), entered September 5, 2006, which denied a motion by defendant Acosta to vacate a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.
A party seeking to vacate a default must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his nonappearance and a meritorious defense to the action ( see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 NY2d 138, 141). Even assuming that Acosta had a viable defense to plaintiffs demand for a broker's commission, he has failed to show a reasonable excuse for his default ( see Residential Bd. of Mgrs. of 99 Jane St. Condominium v Rockrose Dev. Corp., 17 AD3d 194). In view of ample documentary evidence that Acosta held out the place of service as his address, he may not now reasonably claim he was not properly served ( see CPLR 308; Gibson, Dunn Crutcher v Global Nuclear Serus. Supply, 280 AD2d 360, 361).