Opinion
05-12-2016
YEA SOON CHUNG, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. MID QUEENS LP, Defendant–Respondent.
Sim & Record, LLP, Bayside (Sang J. Sim of counsel), for appellants. Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Scott T. Horn of counsel), for respondent.
Sim & Record, LLP, Bayside (Sang J. Sim of counsel), for appellants. Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Scott T. Horn of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered December 18, 2014, which denied plaintiffs' motion for entry of a default judgment against defendant, and granted defendant's cross motion for an order compelling plaintiffs to accept the answer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court's denial of plaintiff's motion for entry of a default judgment was a provident exercise of discretion. Defendant's excuse for its delay in answering, based on law office failure, while “not particularly compelling,” was sufficient to show good cause for the delay (see Marine v. Montefiore Health Sys., Inc., 129 A.D.3d 428, 429, 9 N.Y.S.3d 580 [1st Dept.2015] ). Further, defendant provided an affidavit of its property manager which, although somewhat perfunctory, at this stage in the proceedings was sufficient to set forth a potentially meritorious defense of lack of notice of any defect in the stairs involved in the accident (see M & E 73–75 LLC v. 57 Fusion LLC, 121 A.D.3d 528, 995 N.Y.S.2d 4 [1st Dept.2014] ; Jones v. 414 Equities LLC, 57 A.D.3d 65, 81, 866 N.Y.S.2d 165 [1st Dept.2008] ). Absent any showing of prejudice to plaintiff, the State's policy of resolving such disputes on the merits warranted denial of the motion and grant of defendant's cross motion (New Media Holding Co. LLC v. Kagalovsky, 97 A.D.3d 463, 465, 949 N.Y.S.2d 22 [1st Dept.2012] ).
TOM, J.P., SWEENY, ANDRIAS, MANZANET–DANIELS, WEBBER, JJ., concur.