ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court correctly granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss the cause of action to recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, since the conduct alleged did not rise to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct needed to support that cause of action (see, Wasserman v. Maimonides Med. Ctr., 268 A.D.2d 425, 426; Howell v. New York Post Co., 81 N.Y.2d 115; Cunningham v. Mertz, 265 A.D.2d 370).
The plaintiffs' remaining contention is without merit.
FLORIO, J.P., SMITH, McGINITY and CRANE, JJ., concur.