Charles Clark, et al., respondents, v. Halmar Equities, Inc., et al., appellants. (2011)

Submitted—October 11, 2011

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), dated June 15, 2010, which granted the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 3124 to compel the defendants' compliance with their discovery demands.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The trial court is vested with broad discretion over the supervision of discovery, and

its determination will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see Congel v. Malfitano, 84 AD3d 1145;  Peluso v. Red Rose Rest., Inc., 78 AD3d 802;  Reilly Green Mtn. Platform Tennis v Cortese, 59 AD3d 694).   Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 3124 to compel the defendants' compliance with their discovery demands.

MASTRO, J.P., ENG, BELEN and HALL, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court