Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellant's argument, the plaintiffs' motion which was, in effect, a motion to "`vacate or modify [a] precalendar conference order'", was procedurally proper (see, Cohalan v. Johnson Elec. Constr. Corp., 105 A.D.2d 770). Moreover, the resulting order of Special Term did not constitute an abuse of discretion (see, Everitt v. Health Maintenance Center, 86 A.D.2d 224, 227). Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.