KOPEC v. CITY OF NEW YORK

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that depositions of the two proposed witnesses were material and necessary to the prosecution of the action ( see, CPLR 3101; Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was to compel the respondent to produce those two witnesses.

O'Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.