In ruling upon plaintiff's motion to strike defendants-respondents' pleadings, the motion court properly inquired, not merely as to whether there had been spoliation of evidence, but also as to whether defendants-respondents' failure to comply with discovery orders had been willful, contumacious, or effected in bad faith (see, Orlando v. Arcade Cleaning Corp., 253 A.D.2d 362; cf., Squitieri v. City of New York, 248 A.D.2d 201). The court's conclusion that plaintiff had not met her burden as movant (see, Forman v. Jamesway Corp., 175 A.D.2d 514, 515) to demonstrate defendants-respondents' willful noncompliance with their discovery obligations, and accordingly had not demonstrated her right to the drastic relief requested, did not constitute an improvident exercise of discretion (see, Dauria v. City of New York, 127 A.D.2d 459, 460).
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.