On December 11, 2024, the Second Department issued a decision in Selene Fin., L.P. v. Beltran, 2024 NY Slip Op. 06230, holding that a detailed explanation of law office failure is sufficient to justify vacating a default judgment, explaining:
A party seeking to vacate a default is required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious defense. The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the sound discretion of the trial court. In making such a determination, the court may excuse default resulting from law office failure. Law office failure may qualify as a reasonable excuse for a party’s default if the claim of such failure is supported by a credible and detailed explanation of the default.
Here, Manorhaven’s counsel submitted an affirmation, which credibly explained that his law firm failed to appear at the inquest because a paralegal had mistakenly updated the case file to reflect that the law firm’s representation had been terminated as to both Beltran and Manorhaven. Given the isolated and unintentional nature of counsel’s error and the strong public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in accepting Manorhaven’s excuse of law office failure. Further, the record sufficiently establishes the existence of a potentially meritorious defense.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).