Opinion
June 4, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Clemente, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was to strike the answer of the appellant Ming Z. Huang, since Dr. Huang has disappeared or intentionally made himself unavailable for several scheduled examinations before trial (see, Rowe v. Lee Gee Sook, 224 A.D.2d 404; Boera v. Batz, 236 A.D.2d 349; Spataro v. Ervin, 186 A.D.2d 793; Amico v. Pepe, 172 A.D.2d 575; Foti v. Suero, 97 A.D.2d 748).
O'Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.