GUILIANO v. CARLISLE

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The nature and degree of the penalty to be imposed pursuant to CPLR 3126 is generally a matter left to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court, and the harsh penalty of striking a pleading is inappropriate absent a clear showing that the failure to comply with discovery demands was willful, contumacious, or in bad faith (see, DeCintio v. Ahmed, 276 A.D.2d 463; Espinal v. City of New York, 264 A.D.2d 806; Smith v. Eastern Long Is. Hosp., 263 A.D.2d 477). The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the appellant's motion which was to strike the respondent's answer and cross claims.