Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The determination whether to strike a pleading for failure to comply with discovery orders lies within the sound discretion of the trial court ( see CPLR 3126; Maignan v Nahar, 37 AD3d 557; Matter of Cohn, 15 AD3d 655; Bates v Baez, 299 AD2d 382; Patterson v Greater N.Y. Corp. of Seventh Day Adventists, 284 AD2d 382, 383). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion to strike the answer ( see CPLR 3126; Casey v Casey, 39 AD3d 579, 580; Pashayan v Corson, 306 AD2d 259; cf. Harris v City of New York, 211 AD2d 663, 664).
The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.