Opinion
Submitted December 6, 2000.
December 27, 2000.
In a proceeding to discharge a mechanic's lien, Ortov Lighting, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Lebowitz, J.), entered February 10, 2000, which denied its motion, in effect, to vacate a prior order of the same court entered April 20, 1999, granting the petition upon its failure to appear or submit written opposition to the petitioner's motion pursuant to Lien Law § 39-a.
Meyers, Saxon Cole, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Gerald Slotnik of counsel), for appellant.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A party seeking to vacate a default must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a meritorious claim or defense (see, Parker v. City of New York, 272 A.D.2d 310; Lovario v. Vuotto, 266 A.D.2d 191; Wynne v. Wagner, 262 A.D.2d 556). The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse for a default lies within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, Parker v. City of New York, supra). We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense to the proceeding. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion.