Defendant's motion to strike plaintiffs' amended errata sheets or for further depositions was properly denied since a witness may make substantive changes to his or her deposition testimony provided the changes are accompanied by a statement of the reasons therefor (CPLR 3116[a]; see, Skeaney v. Silver Beach Realty Corp., 10 A.D.2d 537). Plaintiffs' amended errata sheets are accompanied by such a statement. The changes raise issues of credibility that do not warrant further depositions but rather should be left for trial (see, Binh v. Bagland USA, 286 A.D.2d 613, citing Boyce v. Vazquez, 249 A.D.2d 724, 725-726). Plaintiffs' motion to strike defendant's answer was denied after the motion court reviewed the materials defendant supplied to plaintiff in discovery. The court correctly determined that defendant had substantially responded to plaintiffs' interrogatories.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.