| Matter of ELRAC, Inc. v Holder |
| 2006 NY Slip Op 05784 |
| Decided on July 18, 2006 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on July 18, 2006
ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P.
FRED T. SANTUCCI
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA
JOSEPH COVELLO, JJ.
2005-06204 DECISION & ORDER
v
Nashon Holder, appellant; Geico Insurance Company, proposed additional respondent-respondent. (Index No. 29428/04)
David Katz & Associates, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Salvatore J.
Sciangula of counsel), for appellant.
Brand Glick & Brand, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Edward J.
Savidge of counsel), for petitioner-
respondent.
Morris, Duffy, Alonso & Faley, LLP, New York, N.Y.
(Pauline E. Glaser and Andrea M. Alonso
of counsel), for proposed additional
respondent-respondent.
In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, Nashon Holder appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated May 6, 2005, which denied his motion, in effect, to vacate a prior order of the same court dated December 3, 2004, entered upon his default, which granted the petition.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion, in effect, to vacate because the appellant's conclusory and unsubstantiated excuse of law office failure did not amount to a reasonable excuse for his failure to oppose the petition (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Matter of Hye-Young Chon v Country Wide Ins. Co., 22 AD3d 849; Grezinsky v Mount [*2]Hebron Cemetery, 305 AD2d 542; Eretz Funding v Shalosh Assoc., 266 AD2d 184, 185).
FLORIO, J.P., SANTUCCI, MASTRO, RIVERA and COVELLO, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court