Opinion
2001-09774
Submitted May 15, 2002.
June 18, 2002.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated September 4, 2001, as granted those branches of the motion of the defendants LS Sons, Inc., and Lloyd Newman, which were to vacate the default of the defendant LS Sons, Inc., in answering the complaint and to compel the plaintiff to accept its untimely answer, and denied his cross motion for leave to enter a default judgment against the defendant LS Sons, Inc.
Jose R. Mendez, P.C., Rego Park, N.Y., for appellant.
Shapiro, Beilly, Rosenberg, Aronowitz, Levy Fox, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Roy J. Karlin of counsel), for respondents.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, HOWARD MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting those branches of the defendants' motion which were to vacate the default of the defendant LS Sons, Inc., in answering the complaint and to compel the plaintiff to accept its untimely answer. The default in answering was short and not willful, and the plaintiff was not prejudiced thereby (see CPLR 2004, 2005, 3012[d]; Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Md. v. Anderson Co., 60 N.Y.2d 693, 695; Santos v. City of New York, 269 A.D.2d 585; Ribowsky v. Allstate Ins. Co., 251 A.D.2d 484; Scagnelli v. Pavone, 178 A.D.2d 590;
Leogrande v. Glass, 106 A.D.2d 431, 432; Lindo v. Evans, 98 A.D.2d 765; Foglia v. Fashion Floors, 79 A.D.2d 598). Furthermore, the defendant LS Sons, Inc., demonstrated a meritorious defense (see Anamdi v. Anugo, 229 A.D.2d 408, 409).
SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.