CENTRAL CITY BROKERAGE CORPORATION v. Jorge Diaz, Defendant. (2008)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy Friedman, J.), entered September 5, 2006, which denied a motion by defendant Acosta to vacate a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

 A party seeking to vacate a default must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for his nonappearance and a meritorious defense to the action (see Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v. A.C. Dutton Lumber Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138, 141, 501 N.Y.S.2d 8, 492 N.E.2d 116 [1986] ).   Even assuming that Acosta had a viable defense to plaintiff's demand for a broker's commission, he has failed to show a reasonable excuse for his default (see Residential Bd. of Mgrs. of 99 Jane St. Condominium v. Rockrose Dev. Corp., 17 A.D.3d 194, 796 N.Y.S.2d 35 [2005] ).   In view of ample documentary evidence that Acosta held out the place of service as his address, he may not now reasonably claim he was not properly served (see CPLR 308[6];  Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher v. Global Nuclear Servs. & Supply, 280 A.D.2d 360, 361, 721 N.Y.S.2d 315 [2001] ).