DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that "the conduct of a trial, including the question of adjournments, is within the sound discretion of the trial court" (Spodek v. Lasser Stables, 89 A.D.2d 892; see, Gandelman v. Gandelman, 90 A.D.2d 494; Matter of Anthony M., 63 N.Y.2d 270, 283; Matter of Hogan v. Hogan, 271 A.D.2d 533; Matter of Carolina P., 232 A.D.2d 564). Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying her request for an adjournment under the circumstances of this case (see, Matter of Hogan v. Hogan, supra; Matter of McEwen [Gerri L.] v. Donnie R.O., 192 A.D.2d 708).