Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 
Second Department, New York.

REN HOEK REALTY, INC., appellant,
v.
FABRICON DESIGN GROUP, INC., respondent.


July 3, 2000.

 Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Kenneth Kirschenbaum and 
Thomas Weiss of counsel), for appellant.

 Sylvor & Richman, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Iris S. Richman of counsel), for 
respondent.


 *384 In an action to recover damages for breach of a commercial lease, the 
plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), 
dated April 8, 1999, which denied its motion to direct the defendant to post an 
undertaking as security for enforcement of an order of the same court, dated 
July 21, 1998, which, upon reargument, adhered to an order of the same court 
dated April 3, 1998, granting the plaintiff partial summary judgment in the 
principal sum of $16,592.24, but stayed the enforcement of that order pending 
entry of a final judgment.

 ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

 **757 CPLR 3212(e) affords the court "wide discretion in imposing conditions 
upon the grant of partial summary judgment" (Robert Stigwood Organisation v. 
Devon Co., 44 N.Y.2d 922, 923, 408 N.Y.S.2d 5, 379 N.E.2d 1136).   Among the 
conditions which may be imposed is a requirement that an undertaking be posted 
as security for an order granting partial judgment where enforcement of that 
order has been stayed pending resolution of the remaining claims and 
counterclaims in the action (see, Curry Rd. v. Rotterdam Realties, 195 A.D.2d 
780, 781, 600 N.Y.S.2d 339;  Dalminter, Inc. v. Dalmine, S.p.A., 29 A.D.2d 852, 
288 N.Y.S.2d 110).   Under the circumstances of this case, however, the Supreme 
Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to 
require the defendant to post an undertaking (see, Curry Rd. v. Rotterdam 
Realties, supra).


 JOY, J.P., FRIEDMANN, KRAUSMAN and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.

711 N.Y.S.2d 756 (Mem), 274 A.D.2d 384, 2000 N.Y. Slip Op. 06716

END OF DOCUMENT