Oberon Securities LLC v. Parmar

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered June 13, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants’ motion for a default judgment on their counterclaim, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court exercised its discretion in a provident manner in denying defendants’ motion for a default judgment. Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that the delay was due to counsel’s error, and there was no evidence of prejudice to defendants (see Smoke v Windermere Owners, LLC, 109 AD3d 742 [1st Dept 2013]; Spira v New York City Tr. Auth., 49 AD3d 478 [1st Dept 2008]; CPLR 3012 [d]). Furthermore, there is a strong public policy of resolving controversies on the merits (see e.g. Myers v City of New *447 York, 110 AD3d 652 [1st Dept 2013]). We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Acosta, J.P., Andrias, Manzanet-Daniels and Kapnick, JJ.