Opinion
1409 CA 15-01024.
12-31-2015
Reed Smith LLP, New York City (Joseph B. Teig of Counsel), for Plaintiff–Appellant.
Reed Smith LLP, New York City (Joseph B. Teig of Counsel), for Plaintiff–Appellant.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:
In seeking to restore this foreclosure action to Supreme Court's calendar after it had been dismissed, plaintiff was required to “ demonstrate a potentially meritorious cause of action, a reasonable excuse for the delay in prosecuting the action, a lack of intent to abandon the action, and a lack of prejudice to the defendants” (Vaream v. Corines, 78 A.D.3d 933, 933, 911 N.Y.S.2d 424). We agree with plaintiff that the order of reference and judgment of foreclosure and sale are sufficient to establish the merit of the action (see GMAC Mtge., LLC v. Alfred, 49 Misc.3d 1214(A), 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 51621[U], *1, 2015 WL 7036818 [Sup.Ct., Albany County, 2015] ). Plaintiff failed, however, to establish a reasonable excuse for its delay (see Okun v. Tanners, 11 N.Y.3d 762, 763, 867 N.Y.S.2d 25, 896 N.E.2d 660; Sang Seok Na v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 88 A.D.3d 980, 981, 931 N.Y.S.2d 398), lack of intent to abandon the action, or lack of prejudice to defendants (see Sierra R. v. Jamaica Hosp. Med. Ctr., 101 A.D.3d 701, 703, 955 N.Y.S.2d 198).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, WHALEN, and DeJOSEPH, JJ., concur.