| Matter of Atkin v Atkin |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 08319 [55 AD3d 905] |
| October 28, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Susanna Atkin, Appellant, v Michael Atkin,Respondent. |
—[*1] Cheryl S. Solomon, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent. Janet Neustaetter, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Barbara H. Dildine of counsel), attorney for thechild.
In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from anorder of the Family Court, Kings County (O'Shea, J.), dated October 1, 2007, which denied hermotion to vacate an order of the same court dated September 17, 2007, which, upon her default inappearing at a hearing, granted the father's petition to modify the parties' judgment of divorce to awardhim sole custody of the parties' child.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The determination of whether to relieve a party of an order entered upon his or her default is withinthe sound discretion of the Family Court (seeMatter of Coates v Lee, 32 AD3d 539 [2006]; Matter of Vanessa F., 9 AD3d 464, 464-465 [2004]). A party seekingto vacate such an order must establish that there was a reasonable excuse for the default and ameritorious defense to the petition (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Coates v Lee, 32 AD3d 539[2006]). We agree with the Family Court that the mother's conclusory, unsupported allegations failed todemonstrate a meritorious defense to the father's petition (see Matter of Coates v Lee, 32 AD3d 539 [2006]; Matter of ShirleyC., 145 AD2d 631, 632 [1988]).
The mother's remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Lifson, Miller and Eng, JJ.,concur.