Opinion
June 15, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. Greenfield, J.).
In this action, commenced in 1983, defendant, after service of his answer, made no further appearances or responses to any of plaintiff's motions, including plaintiff's successful motion for summary judgment, which motion was granted on default in March of 1984, with a direction to the parties to settle an order. It appears that plaintiff's first notice of settlement was rejected for failure to submit an affidavit of lateness. Subsequently, on or about October 19, 1984, plaintiff served an affirmation of lateness and a copy of the order with notice of settlement and the order was signed and entered November 26, 1984. To the extent that defendant's argument is addressed to the late entry of the settled order, that argument is not preserved for appellate review inasmuch as no objection was raised at the time of settlement of the order (Martin v. Triborough Bridge Tunnel Auth., 180 A.D.2d 596, 597, amended on other grounds 182 A.D.2d 545).
The order granting plaintiff judgment for the sum of $141,898.27 was entered November 26, 1984. Due to law office failure, plaintiff did not enter judgment with the clerk until June 7, 1991. However, our holding in Helfant v. Sobkowski ( 174 A.D.2d 340) is dispositive of defendant's argument that plaintiff's judgment should be vacated and the action deemed abandoned pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.48. Nor is CPLR 3215 applicable (see, Montalvo v. Nel Taxi Corp., 114 A.D.2d 494, 495, lv denied in part and dismissed in part 68 N.Y.2d 643; Q.P.I. Rests. v. Slevin, 93 A.D.2d 767). However, because of plaintiff's inordinate delay in entering judgment, we conclude that interest should commence running from June 7, 1991, the date of entry of judgment, rather than November 19, 1984, the date of entry of the order granting judgment.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.