Opinion
May 6, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondent Nesly Beavsoliel.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion when it denied the plaintiff's request for a continuance pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f) ( see, Pannullo v. Staro, 139 A.D.2d 636; see generally, Freier v. AMAX, Inc., 217 A.D.2d 981).
The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit. Thompson, J.P., Joy, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.