Opinion
October 29, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.).
Defendant offered both a reasonable excuse for his delay in serving his answer and a meritorious defense to the action (see, Pokoik v Gittens, 171 A.D.2d 470). It is evident that defendant's default was not deliberate, and that he moved promptly to vacate the alleged default. Further, the delay in answering did not prejudice plaintiff (see, Bermudez v City of New York, 22 A.D.2d 865). Lastly, "[w]hile defendant's opposition papers did not include an affidavit of merits, the verified answer can be considered in determining whether a meritorious defense exists" (Meyer v Rose, 160 A.D.2d 565).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Ross, JJ.