Opinion
April 22, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, as the judgment was superseded by the order made upon reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated August 4, 1994, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
The record supports the Supreme Court's determination that the defendants' failure to comply with court-ordered discovery was deliberate and contumacious ( see, Ortiz v. Weaver, 188 A.D.2d 290; Forman v. Jamesway Corp., 175 A.D.2d 514; Scharlack v. Richmond Mem. Hosp., 127 A.D.2d 580).
It should not be necessary for parties to bring on repeated motions for the production of court-ordered documents. In an earlier order, the court warned that it would not tolerate any further delay in the production of court-ordered documents, and that noncompliance might result in the striking of a pleading.
Under the circumstances we have no difficulty in upholding the court's determination and therefore conclude that the Supreme Court properly struck the defendants' answer and awarded judgment to the plaintiff ( see, Ortiz v. Weaver, supra; Battaglia v Hofmeister, 100 A.D.2d 833). Rosenblatt, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.