Opinion
February 2, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.).
The motion was properly denied, notwithstanding plaintiffs' default in opposing it, because of appellant's counsel's failure to "submit documentation" of his having conferred with opposing counsel, both "by telephone and by letter", in a good faith effort to resolve the matter of plaintiffs' unserved bill of particulars, as required by the motion court's prior order granting appellant's prior motion to compel plaintiffs' service of a bill of particulars but conditioning the "making [of] any further motions" upon such communications and documentation. In any event, appellant, who notes plaintiffs' failure to furnish a bill of particulars at two preliminary conferences held after the prior order, does not describe what transpired at those conferences or explain why the court took no action thereat, and thus fails to show willful and contumacious conduct necessary to the relief it seeks.
Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Lerner, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.