Opinion
May 6, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
In a previous action between the parties herein, the Supreme Court precluded the plaintiffs from calling a medical expert on the ground that they had failed to comply with the court's order regarding expert disclosure. Thereafter, prior to any proof being taken at trial, the Supreme Court granted the defendants' respective motions to dismiss the complaint, and this Court affirmed the judgment entered thereon ( see, Kalkan v. Nyack Hosp., 214 A.D.2d 538).
Prior to this Court's affirmance, and less than six months after the Supreme Court's judgment dismissing the complaint, the plaintiffs commenced a second action pursuant to CPLR 205 (a). The Supreme Court granted the defendants' respective motions to dismiss the complaint in this action and this appeal followed.
Where a plaintiff's noncompliance with a disclosure order results in an order of preclusion so as to effectively close the plaintiff's proof, the dismissal of the complaint resulting from the noncompliance is on the merits ( see, Strange v. Montefiore Hosp. Med. Ctr., 59 N.Y.2d 737; compare, Maitland v. Trojan Elec. Mach. Co., 65 N.Y.2d 614). Therefore, the defendants' respective motions to dismiss the complaint in this action were properly granted. Balletta, J.P., Sullivan, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.