On August 31, 2022, the Second Department issued a decision in S & J Serv. Ctr., Inc. v. Commerce Commercial Group, Inc., 2022 NY Slip Op. 05104, holding that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for default judgment because the defendant presented a reasonable excuse and a meritorious defense, explaining:
To defeat a facially sufficient CPLR 3215 motion, a defendant must show either that there was no default, or that he or she had a reasonable excuse for his or her delay and a potentially meritorious defense. Whether there is a reasonable excuse for a default is a discretionary, sui generis determination to be made by the court based on all relevant factors, including the extent of the delay, whether there has been prejudice to the opposing party, whether there has been willfulness, and the strong public policy in favor of resolving cases on the merits. Law office failure may be accepted by the court as a reasonable excuse where it is supported by a detailed and credible explanation of the default. Here, in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion, under the circumstances, the defendant established a reasonable excuse for failing to timely serve an answer, as well as a potentially meritorious defense to the action.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).