Opinion
June 15, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We find that it was not an improvident exercise of the court's discretion to deny the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment and to grant the plaintiff additional time to respond to a demand for a further bill of particulars (see, Darrell v Yurchuk, 174 A.D.2d 557; Vanek v. Mercy Hosp., 162 A.D.2d 680). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, O'Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.