IN RE: CEIRRA L. (2008)

 In this neglect proceeding pursuant to article 10 of the Family Court Act, respondent father appeals from an order denying his motion to vacate an order of fact-finding, entered upon his failure to appear at the fact-finding hearing following which Family Court found that he neglected his daughter.   Contrary to the contention of the father, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion.   A parent who was not present at a hearing conducted pursuant to Family Court Act article 10 is entitled to vacatur of an order entered upon such a default where he or she demonstrates a meritorious defense to the petition, “unless the court finds that the parent ․ willfully refused to appear at the hearing, in which case the court may deny the motion” (§ 1042;  see Matter of Skyla C., 36 A.D.3d 614, 828 N.Y.S.2d 166).   The evidence in the record establishes that the father was present in court when the fact-finding hearing was scheduled, that his attorney left him several telephone messages reminding him of the date and time of the hearing, and that the father did not appear at the hearing.   Thus, the court properly found that the father willfully failed to appear at the hearing (see Matter of Nicholas S., 46 A.D.3d 830, 831, 848 N.Y.S.2d 311;  Matter of Christian T., 12 A.D.3d 613, 785 N.Y.S.2d 93).   Furthermore, “[e]ven assuming, arguendo, that the father did not willfully refuse to appear at the fact-finding hearing, we conclude that he failed to show a meritorious defense to the neglect petition” (Matter of Alexis D., 46 A.D.3d 1450, 1451, 847 N.Y.S.2d 490;  cf. Matter of Precyse T., 13 A.D.3d 1113, 788 N.Y.S.2d 542).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: