Opinion
April 15, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Scholnick, J.).
Order dated May 16, 1984 affirmed, insofar as appealed from.
Defendant is awarded one bill of costs.
Special Term did not improvidently exercise its discretion in refusing to open the plaintiffs' default in serving a verified bill of particulars within 60 days after service upon them of a copy of the conditional preclusion order ( Schicchi v. Green Constr. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 509; Ferrigno v. St. Charles Hosp., 86 A.D.2d 594). Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the lack of compliance with the terms of the order was excusable. Specifically, although there are four plaintiffs in this case, there were no extensive records to be compiled or persons to be interviewed due to the limited nature of the parties' injuries and medical treatment ( cf. Wheeler v. State of New York, 104 A.D.2d 496). Moreover, plaintiffs' counsel did not contact the attorneys for the defendant to advise them of the reason for the delay, did not make a motion within the 60-day period for an extension, and failed to supply a sufficient affidavit of merits in opposition to the cross motion for summary judgment predicated upon the noncompliance with the preclusion order ( see, Amodeo v Radler, 89 A.D.2d 594, affd 59 N.Y.2d 1001). Titone, J.P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.