Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
It is well established that a corporation has the right in the first instance to determine which of its representatives will appear for an examination before trial (see, Mercado v. Alexander, 227 A.D.2d 391; Defina v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 217 A.D.2d 681, 682; Tower v. Chemical Bank, 140 A.D.2d 514, 515). Here, the defendant produced two knowledgeable witnesses who testified with respect to the underlying incident. The plaintiff failed to show that those witnesses had insufficient knowledge or were otherwise inadequate, and that the proposed witnesses possessed information which was material and necessary to the prosecution of the case (see, Saxe v. City of New York, 250 A.D.2d 751; Carter v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 225 A.D.2d 512; Defina v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., supra). Accordingly, the court, upon reargument, properly denied the plaintiffs' motion to compel further depositions.
O'Brien, J. P., Ritter, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.