In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 2, 1970, which granted plaintiffs' motion to compel defendant to answer the complaint and denied defendant's cross motion to dismiss the action for failure to serve the complaint, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd. [b]). Order reversed, on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements; plaintiffs' motion denied; and defendant's cross motion granted. Under the circumstances of this case it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny defendant's motion. The excuse offered of difficulty in obtaining a medical report did not prevent the serving of a complaint. Defendant did nothing to mislead or lull plaintiffs into any false sense of security. The law office failure of the attorney is an inadequate excuse ( Welsh v. Kaskel, 33 A.D.2d 803; Cerf v. Ackerly, 30 A.D.2d 687; Dolendi v. Maksiks, 30 A.D.2d 687; Gerson v. Finkelstein, 29 A.D.2d 552). Christ, P.J., Rabin, Hopkins, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.