
    Monserrate Cruz et al., Respondents, v Verville Whyte, Appellant.
   Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered, respectively, March 14, 1975, granting plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s answer for failure to appear for examination before trial as directed by a prior order, and April 16, 1975, denying defendant’s motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, with $60 costs and disbursements to respondent. Study of the record discloses that defendant consented to an adjournment to December 2, 1974 of the court-directed examination and willfully did not appear. His past conduct with respect to previous scheduled examinations buttresses this conclusion. Further, defense counsel admittedly has experienced indifference and lack of co-operation on the part of his client and has difficulty in contacting him. As aptly stated by Special Term: "Unless defendant’s attorneys can demonstrate to the court a reasonable basis to assure defendant’s attendance to take his deposition, the relief ordered herein should remain undisturbed.” Concur—Stevens, P. J., Murphy, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.  