Majority
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered June 12, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiff from offering evidence at trial, or alternatively, to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness and compel plaintiff’s deposition and physical examination, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Supreme Court properly denied as untimely the motion to
We reject defendants’ argument that the motion court should have considered their motion to be a motion in limine. Any outstanding discovery is due to defendants’ own inaction, and they cannot avoid the time requirements of 22 NYCRR 202.21 (e) by characterizing their motion as a motion in limine (see Sadek v Wesley, 117 AD3d 193 , 203 [1st Dept 2014]; see also Brewi-Bijoux v City of New York, 73 AD3d 1112 , 1113 [2d Dept 2010]).
We have considered defendants’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
Concur—Mazzarelli, J.R, Saxe, Moskow-itz, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.
Cases cited
- Kelley v. Zavalidroga 55 AD3d 1391 p. 435
- People v. Kadarko 11 NY3d 911 p. 435
- Schroeder v. IESI NY Corp. 24 AD3d 180 at 181 p. 435
- Price v. Bloomingdale's, a Division of Federated Department Stores, Inc. 166 AD2d 151 at 151-152 p. 435
- Sadek v. Wesley 117 AD3d 193 at 203 p. 435
- Brewi-Bijoux v. City of New York 73 AD3d 1112 at 1113 p. 435