SHEIKH v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY (1999)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered on or about November 19, 1997, which denied plaintiff's motion to vacate a prior order, entered May 30, 1997, granting defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint for plaintiff's failure to comply with disclosure orders, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 A party seeking to vacate a default must satisfy the two-pronged burden of showing a meritorious claim or defense and a reasonable excuse for the default (Goncalves v. Stuyvesant Dev. Assocs., 232 A.D.2d 275, 648 N.Y.S.2d 441).   The mere fact that there was an accident causing plaintiff's injuries is insufficient to show liability on the part of any of the defendants (Shkoditch v. One Hundred & Fifty William St. Corp., 17 A.D.2d 168, 233 N.Y.S.2d 179, affd. 16 N.Y.2d 609, 261 N.Y.S.2d 61, 209 N.E.2d 107).   Nor does plaintiff's failure to maintain contact with his attorney and to keep himself apprised of the progress of his lawsuit constitute a reasonable excuse for his default (see, Dudley v. Steese, 228 A.D.2d 931, 644 N.Y.S.2d 824;  compare, Reyes v. New York City Hous. Auth., 236 A.D.2d 277, 653 N.Y.S.2d 585).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.