Opinion
March 1, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable by the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The plaintiff contends that it was error for the court to direct her to file a note of issue in light of the fact that the defendants' examinations before trial were still outstanding.
It is well settled that the supervision of disclosure and the setting of reasonable terms and conditions therefor rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, and absent an improvident exercise of that discretion, its determination will not be disturbed ( see, Kaplan v. Herbstein, 175 A.D.2d 200). In light of the pattern of delay on the part of the plaintiff and her disregard of the court's directives, we find no improvident exercise of discretion in this case.
Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.