[*1]
Soroudi v River Terrace Apt. LLC
2014 NY Slip Op 50434(U) [42 Misc 3d 151(A)]
Decided on March 21, 2014
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on March 21, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: Torres, J.P., Shulman, Hunter, Jr., JJ
571000/13.

Mehran Soroudi, Plaintiff-appellant - -

against

River Terrace Apt. LLC, Defendant-Respondent, -and- 515 East 72nd Street Condominium and Cooper Square Realty, Defendants.


Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), dated April 12, 2013, which denied his motion to vacate his default and restore the case to the trial calendar.


Per Curiam.

Order (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), dated April 12, 2013, affirmed, without costs, and without prejudice to plaintiff's right, if so advised, to renew his motion to vacate the default judgment on proper papers.

The pro se plaintiff's motion to vacate the default judgment, though expeditiously made and accompanied by a sufficient showing that plaintiff's nonappearance was the result of an inadvertent calendaring error, was properly denied in the absence of an affidavit based on personal knowledge establishing the merits of the claim. Nor was this deficiency remedied by plaintiff's submission of an unsigned affidavit of merit in reply (see Bustamante v Green Door Realty Corp., 69 AD3d 521, 522 [2010] Migdol v City of New York, 291 AD2d 201 [2002] see also Buonaiuto v Shulberg, 254 AD2d 384 [1998]). Given the strong policy favoring resolution of cases on the merits (see Chevalier v 368 E. 148th St. Assoc., LLC, 80 AD3d 411, 413—414 [2011]), and since it does not appear that defendants have been prejudiced by plaintiff's isolated default in this actively litigated case, we afford plaintiff a further opportunity to seek vacatur relief below (see Collado v Quinones, 52 AD2d 534 [1976]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: March 21, 2014