DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3126(3) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them. The appellants failed to establish that the conduct of the injured plaintiff in delaying a physical examination by their physician was willful, contumacious, deliberate, or in bad faith (see, Little v. Long Is. Jewish Med. Ctr., 231 A.D.2d 496 ; Magrabi v. City of New York, 211 A.D.2d 422, 423 ). Upon receiving the 90-day notice, the injured plaintiff made a good faith effort to comply with the preliminary conference order. Thereafter, the injured plaintiff timely filed a note of issue.
Since the appellants were still seeking disclosure, it would have been inappropriate to place the action on the trial calendar (see,Scoglio v. Scoglio, 253 A.D.2d 520 ; Little v. Long Is. Jewish Med. Ctr., 231 A.D.2d 496 ; DeSimone v. DiMaria, 216 A.D.2d 437 ; Canzoneri v. Wigand Corp., 213 A.D.2d 579 ; Markarian v. Hundert, 204 A.D.2d 697 ), and the plaintiffs' conduct did not warrant dismissal pursuant toCPLR 3216 (see, Gonzalez v. Fred Deutsch Co., Inc., 193 A.D.2d 449 ).