LESSER v. LACHER

Whether to preclude expert testimony as a sanction for a failure to identify a prospective expert witness or provide the substance of his or her testimony pursuant to CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i) is a matter best left to the trial court's discretion (see, Vigilant Ins. Co. v Barnes, 199 A.D.2d 257), and, under the circumstances of this case, the determination not to preclude was proper (see, Simpson v Bellew, 161 A.D.2d 693, 698, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 808). The record provides no compelling reason not to defer to the Referee as arbiter of fact and credibility (see, Zuckerman v Altman, 200 A.D.2d 520).

We have considered the defendants' remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro and Asch, JJ.