Lamar v City of New York

2009 NY Slip Op 08974 [68 AD3d 449]

December 3, 2009

Appellate Division, First Department

As corrected through Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Michael E. Lamar, Appellant, v City of New York,Respondent, et al., Defendants.

—[*1]Richard M. Duignan, New York, for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Victoria Scalzo of counsel), forrespondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered August 6, 2008,which denied plaintiff's motion for a default judgment against the City of New York and grantedthe City's cross motion for an order deeming its answer to be timely served nunc pro tunc,unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While the City's generalized assertion of law office failure as the excuse for its delay is notparticularly compelling, it constitutes "good cause" for the delay (see Spira v New York City Tr. Auth.,49 AD3d 478 [2008]). No prejudice to plaintiff has been shown (see Cirillo v Macy's, Inc., 61 AD3d538, 540 [2009]), and New York's public policy strongly favors litigating matters on themerits (see Silverio v City of New York, 266 AD2d 129 [1999]). An affidavit of merit isnot required where no default order or judgment has been entered (see Cirillo, supra).Concur—Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.