On the application of a party, the court may extend the time to appear or plead, or compel the acceptance of a pleading untimely served. Here, in order to compel the plaintiff to accept her untimely answer, the defendant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the delay and a potentially meritorious defense. The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the sound discretion of the Supreme Court. The Appellate Division held that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in finding that the defendant proffered a reasonable excuse for her untimely answer. The bare allegation by the defendant's attorney that the delay was caused by the defendant's insurance carrier is insufficient to excuse the delay in answering the complaint. The absence of a reasonable excuse for the default renders it unnecessary to determine whether she demonstrated the existence of a potentially meritorious defense.
Goldstein v Ilaz, NY Slip Op 04154 (2d Dep't June 29, 2022)
