The motion was properly denied in the absence of a plausible explanation for not having made it until a year after the action was commenced, and also after the note of issue had been filed (see, CPLR 511[a]). Defendants' showing of the inconvenience to two witnesses, residents of eastern Nassau and western Suffolk Counties, in having to travel to downtown New York instead of Riverhead, is not sufficiently compelling to counter the unreasonable delay in making the motion.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.