Opinion
March 21, 2000
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered March 29, 1999, which granted defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for a default judgment on their counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Kenneth T. Wasserman, for plaintiff-appellant.
Joseph A. Vogel, for defendants-respondents.
Thomas D. Czik, for defendant.
ROSENBERGER, J.P., ELLERIN, RUBIN, FRIEDMAN, JJ.
On a motion for summary judgment, once the proponent has demonstrated, prima facie, entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, it becomes the burden of the opponent to present admissible evidence showing the existence of a triable issue of fact. Mere conclusions are insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (Plantamura v. Penske Truck Leasing, 246 A.D.2d 347, 348). Here, while defendants met their burden, plaintiff, in opposition, offered only self-serving conclusory assertions of breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Nor did plaintiff show a reasonable excuse for its failure to timely reply to defendants' counterclaims.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.