Opinion
October 30, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the order entered June 29, 1988 is dismissed as academic; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the order entered October 24, 1988, except the provision thereof which imposed a $750 sanction, is dismissed as academic; and it is further,
Ordered that so much of the order entered October 24, 1988 as imposed a $750 sanction is affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
On appeal, we are advised by counsel for the defendants that they have accepted a further bill of particulars and response to a demand for collateral source information without objection. In light of these circumstances, the appeal from the order entered June 29, 1988 and the appeal from the order entered October 24, 1988, except the provision thereof which imposed a $750 sanction, must be dismissed as academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715; cf., Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 608 [People], 72 N.Y.2d 307, 311). The only right or interest of the parties which remains in issue is the imposition of the $750 sanction. The $750 award was in the nature of a sanction for failure to comply with discovery orders (see, CPLR 3126; Associated Mut. Ins. Co. v Dyland Tavern, 105 A.D.2d 892, 893; Renford v Lizardo, 104 A.D.2d 717, 718). We find that the imposition of that sanction was not an improvident exercise of discretion. Spatt, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.