The following papers read on this motion by defendant, Rock Group NY Corp. to vacate the default judgment against it, dated November 14, 2018. Papers Numbered Notice of Motion — Affirmation — Exhibits 1 Affirmation in Opposition — Exhibits — Memorandum of Law 2 Reply Affirmation 3 Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that the motion is determined as follows: Pursuant to the decision dated November 14, 2018 and entered on December 3, 2018, this court granted, without opposition, plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment against all defendants. Defendant, Rock Group NY Corp. (“defendant”) now moves to vacate that decision, pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(1). A party seeking to vacate a default in opposing a motion must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Turko v. Daffy’s, Inc., 111 AD3d 615 [2d Dept 2013]). The determination of whether an excuse is reasonable lies within the discretion of the court (Maspeth Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Brooklyn Heritage, LLC, 138 AD3d 793 [2d Dept 2016]).1 In the case at bar, defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its default. Defendant moves to vacate on the ground that defendant was unaware that its broker did not forward the complaint and notify the insurance carrier. In support, defendant submits, among other things, a sworn affidavit of defendant’s president, Simranpal Singh, stating that defendant was notified of this case in February of 2018 and that it immediately notified its insurance broker, and a copy of an email correspondence to that effect. “[A] general assertion that the default was occasioned by the defendant’s insurance broker or liability carrier is insufficient” (Glanz v. Parkway Kosher Caterers, 176 AD3d 686 [2d Dept 2019], citing Spitzer v. Landau, 104 AD3d 936 [2d Dept 2013]). Singh further states that defendant only learned of the default in March of 2021 and that defendant was of plaintiff’s motion for default prior to March of 2021. As in Uceta v. Sherwood, LLC, defendant’s contention that it believed that its insurance broker had forwarded the summons and complaint to its insurer and that its insurer was providing a defense, is unreasonable given that defendant was served with, among other things, plaintiffs motion for leave to enter a default judgment (189 AD3d 1114 [2d Dept 2020]). Further, defendant proffers no reasonable excuse for the two-and-a-half-year delay in moving to vacate its default judgment and in taking any steps to ascertain the status of the case (Campbell v. TPK Heating, Ltd., 181 AD3d 642 [2d Dept 2020]). Since defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its default, the court need not consider whether defendant demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense to the action (Trepel v. Greenman-Pedersen, Inc., 99 AD3d 789 [2d Dept 2012]). Accordingly, the motion by defendant, Rock Group NY Cor. to vacate, is denied. Dated: November 24, 2021
