In Hazim v. Winter (234 A.D.2d 422 (2nd Dept. 1996)), the plaintiff moved for an entry of a default judgment. The Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's application and granted the defendant leave to answer the complaint. The Second Department upheld the Court's denial, but permitted the plaintiff to renew its application on proper papers, stating that the complaint verified by plaintiff's counsel, tantamount to an attorney's affidavit, was insufficient to support "entry" of judgment pursuant to CPLR 3215. Unlike the plaintiff here, the judgment of default in Hazim appeared to be left undisturbed after the Supreme's Court's denial of entry. The Court struck the portion of the Supreme Court's order granting leave to the defendant to serve an answer, as there was no showing of a meritorious defense and excusable default. Here however, the underlying default judgments and the entry thereof are deemed a nullity, thereby vitiating the need for the defendant to establish a meritorious defense and excusable default.