Opinion
December 21, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.).
In furtherance of the policy favoring the resolution of actions on the merits, it is well settled that the harsh remedy of striking a pleading should not be employed without a clear showing of a deliberate and willful refusal to disclose (Cruzatti v St. Mary's Hosp., 193 A.D.2d 579). No such showing was made here with respect to the failure to implement the preliminary conference order.
Plaintiffs' notices to admit, which for the most part repeated the allegations of the complaint, improperly demanded that defendants concede many matters that are in dispute or clearly denied. A notice to admit is to be used only for disposing of uncontroverted questions of fact or those that are easily provable (CPLR 3123; Hodes v City of New York, 165 A.D.2d 168), and is certainly not intended as a means of compelling an opposing party to admit to the most fundamental and material of the contested issues of fact, as plaintiffs appear to be endeavoring to do (Miller v Hilman Kelly Co., 177 A.D.2d 1036).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.