SINDEBAND v. McCLEOD

Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, as the judgment was superseded by the order made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated August 4, 1994, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The record supports the Supreme Court's determination that the defendants' failure to comply with court-ordered discovery was deliberate and contumacious ( see, Ortiz v. Weaver, 188 A.D.2d 290; Forman v. Jamesway Corp., 175 A.D.2d 514; Scharlack v. Richmond Mem. Hosp., 127 A.D.2d 580).

It should not be necessary for parties to bring on repeated motions for the production of court-ordered documents. In an earlier order, the court warned that it would not tolerate any further delay in the production of court-ordered documents, and that noncompliance might result in the striking of a pleading.

Under the circumstances we have no difficulty in upholding the court's determination and therefore conclude that the Supreme Court properly struck the defendants' answer and awarded judgment to the plaintiff ( see, Ortiz v. Weaver, supra; Battaglia v Hofmeister, 100 A.D.2d 833). Rosenblatt, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.