9 BROTHERS BUILDING SUPPLY CORP., Respondent, v THERESA BUONAMICIA, Defendant, and DIEGO CUERVO, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York
965 N.Y.S.2d 380
Ordered that the order dated May 6, 2011, is affirmed, with costs.
In order to vacate the order striking his answer based upon his default in appearing for a scheduled conference before the court, the appellant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear and a potentially meritorious defense (see Hwang v Tam, 72 AD3d 741 [2010]; D & W Constr. v Israel, 54 AD3d 889 [2008]; Gazetten Contr., Inc. v HCO, Inc., 45 AD3d 530 [2007]; M.S. Hi-Tech, Inc. v Thompson, 23 AD3d 442 [2005]; Travis v Mason, 17 AD3d 449 [2005]; Contractors Cas. & Sur. Co. v 535 Broadhollow Realty, 276 AD2d 737, 738 [2000];
Here, the appellant failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear at the scheduled conference (see Franchise Acquisitions Group Corp. v Jefferson Val. Mall Ltd. Partnership, 51 AD3d 717 [2008]; cf. Orwell Bldg. Corp. v Bessaha, 5 AD3d 573 [2004]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant‘s motion to vacate the order dated April 27, 2009.
Skelos, J.P., Hall, Lott and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.
