DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff disregarded the defendants' demands for disclosure and an order of the Supreme Court directing disclosure. The belated disclosure she provided in response to the defendants' instant motion to dismiss was inadequate. Furthermore, she failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for the inordinate delay. The plaintiff's conduct in this case supports an inference that her noncompliance was willful and contumacious. Consequently, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in dismissing the complaint (see, Ranfort v. Peak Tours, 250 A.D.2d 747; Geltman v. St. Agnes Hosp., 186 A.D.2d 534; DeMasi v. Dine, 155 A.D.2d 583).