DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Pursuant to Disciplinary Rule 2-110 of the Code of Professional Responsibility DR 2-110 ( see 22 NYCRR 1200.15) a lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if the client insists upon presenting a claim or defense that is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law ( see 22 NYCRR 1200.15[c][1][i]). Additionally, a lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if the client, by his or her conduct, "renders it unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out employment effectively" ( 22 NYCRR 1200.15[c][1][iv]). Contrary to the plaintiffs' contentions, the nonparty-respondent demonstrated good cause in support of its motion for leave to withdraw as counsel ( see Winters v. Rise Steel Erection Corp., 231 A.D.2d 626; Sansiviero v. Sanders, 117 A.D.2d 794). Thus, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in permitting it to withdraw from further representation of the plaintiffs ( see Positano v. Maimonides Med. Cent., 238 A.D.2d 560; see also Klagsbrun v. Klagsbrun, 192 A.D.2d 306; Bankers Trust Co. v. Hogan, 187 A.D.2d 305).
S. MILLER, J.P., LUCIANO, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.