Russo v. CamarasanaRusso v. Camarasana
Ordered that the order dated May 25, 2005, is reversed insofar
This Court has adopted a liberal policy with respect to vacating defaults in matrimonial cases, particularly where, as here, the moving party has advanced a reasonable excuse and a meritorious position (see Payne v Payne, 4 AD3d 512, 513 [2004]; Louis v Louis, 231 AD2d 612 [1996]). Under the circumstances of this case, the court should have granted the plaintiff‘s motion to vacate with respect to the issues of custody and an attorney‘s fee. Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for a hearing and a new determination on the issues of custody and an attorney‘s fee.
H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.