DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated December 3, 2002, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated August 8, 2002, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiffs.
Where a plaintiff has put her physical state at issue and displays symptoms which simultaneously are serious, complex, and perplexing, she may be compelled to undergo additional objective testing procedures which are safe, painless, and noninvasive ( see Lapera v. Shafron, 159 A.D.2d 614, 614-615; see also Lefkowitz v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., 94 A.D.2d 18). Here, the urodynamic study sought by the defendants is potentially harmful due to a risk of infection, and is clearly invasive. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants' motion to compel the plaintiff Florence Bobka to submit to the testing ( see Marino v. Pena, 211 A.D.2d 668; Lapera v. Safron, supra; Lefkowitz v. Nassau County Med. Ctr., supra; CPLR 3121).
SMITH, J.P., LUCIANO, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.