BYRNES, JAMES R. v. SATTERLY, M.D., CLYDE

Scudder, P.J., and Smith, J.

(dissenting). We respectfully dissent because we cannot agree with the majority that Supreme Court abused its discretion in precluding plaintiffs expert from rendering an opinion that exceeded the scope of the expert disclosure statement plaintiff provided to defendants during pretrial discovery and thus that reversal on the law is warranted (see e.g. McColgan v Brewer, 84 AD3d 1573 [2011]; Neumire v Kraft Foods, 291 AD2d 784, 786 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 613 [2002]). Nor can it be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion so as to warrant…