Opinion
2017–05898 Index No. 50845/14
07-03-2019
Jennifer HAYES, etc., Appellant, v. Mohammad F. AKHTER, etc., et al., Respondents.
Krentsel & Guzman, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Steven E. Krentsel, Julie T. Mark, and Marcia Raicus of counsel), for appellant. Westermann Sheehy Keenan Samaan & Aydelott, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Timothy J. Lenane of counsel), for respondent Mohammad F. Akhter. Rende, Ryan & Downes, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Jonathan Reed and Alissa A. Mendys of counsel), for respondents Kenneth K. Zweig and St. Luke's Cornwall Hospital. Feldman, Kleidman, Coffey, Sappe & Regenbaum LLP, Fishkill, N.Y. (Marsha Solomon Weiss of counsel), for respondent George Profeta. Catania, Mahon, Milligram & Rider, PLLC, Newburgh, N.Y. (Ari I. Bauer of counsel), for respondent Richard Marc Diamond.
Krentsel & Guzman, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Steven E. Krentsel, Julie T. Mark, and Marcia Raicus of counsel), for appellant.
Westermann Sheehy Keenan Samaan & Aydelott, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Timothy J. Lenane of counsel), for respondent Mohammad F. Akhter.
Rende, Ryan & Downes, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Jonathan Reed and Alissa A. Mendys of counsel), for respondents Kenneth K. Zweig and St. Luke's Cornwall Hospital.
Feldman, Kleidman, Coffey, Sappe & Regenbaum LLP, Fishkill, N.Y. (Marsha Solomon Weiss of counsel), for respondent George Profeta.
Catania, Mahon, Milligram & Rider, PLLC, Newburgh, N.Y. (Ari I. Bauer of counsel), for respondent Richard Marc Diamond.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JOSEPH J. MALTESE, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
In this action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff moved, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(1) to vacate an order and judgment (one paper) dated January 18, 2017 (hereinafter the January 18 order), and to restore the action to active status. The January 18 order, upon the plaintiff's default in appearing at a compliance conference on January 4, 2017, dismissed the complaint pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27. By order dated May 5, 2017, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's motion. The plaintiff appeals.
Pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(1), in order for the Supreme Court to vacate the January 18 order, the plaintiff was required to show both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action (see CPLR 5015[a][1] ; Wright v. City of Poughkeepsie, 136 A.D.3d 809, 809, 24 N.Y.S.3d 523 ; Mazzio v. Jennings, 128 A.D.3d 1032, 1032, 8 N.Y.S.3d 596 ). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, she failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her default in appearing at the compliance conference. The proffered excuse, which consisted of an undetailed, unsubstantiated, vague, and conclusory claim of law office failure (see Dobbyn–Blackmore v. City of New York, 123 A.D.3d 1083, 1084, 1 N.Y.S.3d 193 ; CEO Bus. Brokers, Inc. v. Alqabili, 105 A.D.3d 989, 990, 963 N.Y.S.2d 711 ), was part of a pattern of willful default and neglect (see Wright v. City of Poughkeepsie, 136 A.D.3d at 809, 24 N.Y.S.3d 523 ; Santiago v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 10 A.D.3d 393, 780 N.Y.S.2d 764 ). Since the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse, we need not reach the issue of whether she demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action (see Wright v. City of Poughkeepsie, 136 A.D.3d at 809, 24 N.Y.S.3d 523 ).
Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination denying the plaintiff's motion.
MASTRO, J.P., MALTESE, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.