Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Under the circumstances of this case, we find that the Court of Claims did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the claimant's motion to vacate the dismissal of her claim, because the claimant offered no reasonable excuse for failing to appear for a scheduled conference and failed to demonstrate that she had a meritorious cause of action (see, 22 NYCRR 206.10 [k]; Putney v Pearlman,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.