Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
As a general rule, the scope of disclosure is entrusted to the Supreme Court (see, Nedell v St. George's Golf Country Club, 203 A.D.2d 121). The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying further discovery about the plaintiff's experts. The plaintiff's disclosure met the minimum statutory requirement for disclosure set forth in CPLR 3101 (d). Any further disclosure would improperly force the plaintiff to reveal the facts upon which her experts are expected to testify (see, Krygier v Airweld, Inc., 176 A.D.2d 700). Moreover, this relatively straightforward automobile accident case does not require the extensive discovery urged by the appellants. Thompson, J.P., Ritter, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.