TORIBIO v. Derez Contracting Corp., Inc., Defendant-Appellant. (2000)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J.), entered March 19, 1999, which granted plaintiff's motion to strike defendant Derez Contracting Corporation's answer pursuant to CPLR 3126, unanimously affirmed, with costs.   Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered June 30, 1999, denying Derez's motion to reargue, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

 In light of defendant Derez's failure to timely and satisfactorily explain its longstanding noncompliance with the court's direction that it produce a knowledgeable witness for deposition, the motion court justifiably concluded that Derez was willfully frustrating the conduct of discovery and properly granted plaintiff's motion to strike Derez's answer (see, Seamon v. Apel, 191 A.D.2d 406, 595 N.Y.S.2d 202).   Derez's motion for reconsideration of plaintiff's motion to strike, although nominally seeking both renewal and reargument, is properly viewed simply as one for reargument (see, Pahl Equipment Corp. v. Kassis, 182 A.D.2d 22, 27, 588 N.Y.S.2d 8, lv. denied in part and dismissed in part 80 N.Y.2d 1005, 592 N.Y.S.2d 665, 607 N.E.2d 812), and no appeal lies from the denial of reargument (Macias v. New York City Tr. Auth., 240 A.D.2d 196, 658 N.Y.S.2d 276).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.