—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered August 3, 1999, which, in an action by a laborer under Labor Law § 240 (1) for personal injuries, denied the motion of third-party defendant, plaintiffs employer, to vacate a prior order, entered on or about April 15, 1999, sua sponte striking its answer, upon its failure to appear at a “compliance conference,” for noncompliance with the court’s compliance conference orders of December 17, 1998 and February 25, 1999 and рreliminary conference order of October 15, 1998, and sanctioning its attorneys $500 payable to the Client Security Fund, unanimоusly affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same cоurt and Justice, entered on or about April 15, 1999 unanimously dismissed, without сosts, as taken from a nonappealable paper.
Third-party defendant’s motion to vacate the April 15, 1999 order, striking its answer and sanctioning its attorneys upon its failure to appear at a third compliance confеrence, was properly denied for failure to show a reasonable excuse for such failure to appear, or for its failure to appear at the seсond compliance conference that ended with an order conditionally striking its answer if the disclosure first directed in the preliminary conference order was not prоvided within 30 days, or for its failure to provide such disclosure. If, as аsserted in third-party defendant’s brief, its attorney inadvertently failеd to make a record of the scheduling of the secоnd compliance conference in her date book, it remains unexplained why third-party defendant did not produce a witness for deposition on the dates directed in the preliminary conference order and first compliance conference order. Nor can there bе a claim of nonreceipt of the conditional order where there is not only proof of service therеof provided by a properly executed affidavit оf service by mailing (see, Matter of Aetna Life & Cas. Co. v Walker,