The following papers, numbered 3, were read on this application to/for Appoint RefereeNotice of Motion/ Petition/ OSC — Affidavits — Exhibits No(s) 1Answering Affidavits — Exhibits No(s) 2Replying No(s) 3DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment against the defendants, appointing a referee to compute the sum due and owing to plaintiff, and amending the caption is denied. Defendant Samuel Ehrenthal’s (hereinafter “defendant”) cross-motion to dismiss this action as abandoned is granted.BackgroundThis foreclosure action arises out of an apartment located at 325 5th Avenue, New York, New York. On March 5, 2007, defendant executed and delivered a note and mortgage to HSBC Mortgage Corporation for $635,600.00. Plaintiff claims that defendant failed to make payments from November 1, 2008 to present. On March 6, 2009, the note and mortgage were transferred to Wells Fargo Bank. Three days later, plaintiff commenced this suit on March 9, 2009.Plaintiff served defendant on March 26, 2009. Defendant did not appear or serve an answer. Defendant’s time to appear and answer expired on April 16, 2009. However, plaintiff did not make an application or a motion for default judgment that year. Plaintiff did not make a motion for default judgment the following year either. In fact, the only action taken by plaintiff after filing the Summons and Complaint in 2009 was the filing of a Consent to Change Attorney form on April 4, 2012. The next action was another change of attorney to the current counsel in 2015.No action was taken by plaintiff for the next three years. On September 12, 2018, the Court held a foreclosure settlement conference and defendant failed to appear. On September 27, 2018, Justice Judith McMahon signed an order directing plaintiff to file a motion for the appointment of a referee within ninety days.As ordered by Justice McMahon, on November 28, 2018, plaintiff brought this motion for an Order to appoint a referee and awarding plaintiff default judgment against the defendants, and amending the caption. Defendant cross-moves to dismiss the action pursuant to CPLR 3215 (c) alleging that the default has been abandoned and that there is no sufficient excuse for plaintiff’s delay in making a motion for default judgment. In reply, plaintiff claims that there is sufficient cause to excuse the delay. Plaintiff also claims that defendant is in default and cannot oppose the motion until the default is vacated (Plaintiff’s Opposition
