The July 13, 1998 order was clearly a nonappealable preliminary conference order (see, fork v. City of New York, 237 A.D.2d 218, citing Everitt v. Health Maintenance Ctr., 86 A.D.2d 224), and we reject plaintiff's claim that such order also "implicitly" denied her motion for disclosure sanctions. The July 15, 1998 order, which explicitly denied plaintiff's motion for disclosure sanctions, was not appealed in timely manner, and we reject plaintiff's attempt to avoid dismissal of the appeal by claiming that its own service of notice of entry of that order was a nullity because the order in fact had not yet been entered (cf., CPLR 2101 [f]).
The motion court erred when it struck from plaintiff's supplemental bill of particulars all newly alleged shoulder injuries. While plaintiff served the supplement at the same time as she filed her note of issue, she was entitled to supplement the bill without leave of the court and to serve additional medical reports not less than 30 days before trial (CPLR 3043 [h]; Uniform Rules for Trial Cts [22 N.Y.CRR] § 202.17 [g]). As such, defendant should be given the opportunity to conduct disclosure on the newly alleged injuries.
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Tom and Lerner, JJ.