
    Karouzin Mardiros, Respondent, v Nabil Ghaly et al., Appellants.
    (Appeal No. 1.)
   — Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in finding that plaintiff’s responses to designated items in defendants’ demand for a bill of particulars were sufficient. The court’s order denying defendants’ motion for reargument is not appealable (see, Fahey v County of Nassau, 111 AD2d 214). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Suffolk County, Baisley, J. — Preclusion Order.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.  