Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying them a continuance to secure the presence of an expert witness (see, Le Jeunne v. Baker, 182 A.D.2d 969; Dunleavy v. Samuel, 177 A.D.2d 540; Balogh v. H.R.B. Caterers, 88 A.D.2d 136). As noted by the trial court, the alleged scheduling problem was of the plaintiffs' own making.
The trial court properly expunged from the record a medical report since a proper foundation for its admission was never established (see, CPLR 4518 [a]; 58 N.Y. Jur 2d, Evidence and Witnesses, §§ 456-463).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.