| Baez v Ende Realty Corp. |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 08638 [78 AD3d 576] |
| November 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Santa Baez, Respondent, v Ende Realty Corp., Appellant, et al.,Defendant. |
—[*1] Michael T. Sucher, Brooklyn, for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered on or about September 14,2009, which denied defendant Ende Realty Corp.'s motion to vacate a default judgment, unanimouslyaffirmed, without costs.
Defendant's failure to keep a current address on file with the Secretary of State, as required byBusiness Corporation Law § 306, does not constitute a "reasonable excuse" for its default, andtherefore vacatur of the default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 is not warranted (see Lawrence vEsplanade Gardens, 213 AD2d 216 [1995]; Associated Imports v Amiel Publ., 168AD2d 354 [1990], lv dismissed 77 NY2d 873 [1991]).
Nor is vacatur pursuant to CPLR 317 warranted, given defendant's failure to make the requiredshowing of lack of notice. Defendant claimed that it had no knowledge of the personal injury action orthe ensuing related fraudulent conveyance action because the postal service did not deliver mail to theaddress of its office, located on its premises. However, plaintiff demonstrated that during the years thatthe actions were pending his attorneys mailed papers related to the actions to defendant at its office onthe premises on 27 occasions and that none of these mailings were returned to sender as undeliverableor otherwise. As the motion court found, the assertion by defendant's principal that she received noneof these mailings was not credible (see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Patrylo], 144 AD2d 243,246 [1988]). Furthermore, despite the argument advanced on appeal, defendant failed to request ahearing below. Finally, mere denial of receipt is insufficient to controvert plaintiff's evidence of mailing.Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.