Opinion
December 19, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Graci, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to compel the plaintiffs to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is otherwise affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the defendant is awarded costs.
The plaintiffs' purported appeal from that portion of the Supreme Court's order which directed them to respond to certain questions propounded at an examination before trial must be dismissed. Although the court's order was made upon a full record and on the defendant's application to compel responses (see, Rockwood Natl. Corp. v Peat, Marwick, Mitchell Co., 59 A.D.2d 573; cf., Eagle Star Ins. Co. v Behar, 140 A.D.2d 664), such an order is nevertheless appealable only by permission (see, Miracolo v Daimler-Benz, A.G., 141 A.D.2d 513; Scott v Vassar Bros. Hosp., 133 A.D.2d 76; Ewell v Moore, 133 A.D.2d 67; Sainz v New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 106 A.D.2d 500). At bar, the plaintiffs have not obtained permission from either the Supreme Court or this court to appeal (see, CPLR 5701 [c]).
With regard to that portion of the court's order compelling the production of certain documents by the plaintiffs, our review of the record discloses that the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in declining to vacate those discovery requests objected to by the plaintiffs on appeal.
We have reviewed the plaintiffs' remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Eiber, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.