Opinion
March 20, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In its motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff established its case as a matter of law through the production of the mortgages and the unpaid notes. The appellants were then required to assert any defenses which would raise a question of fact concerning their default on the mortgages (see, Marine Midland Bank v. Freedom Rd. Realty Assocs., 203 A.D.2d 538; Sloane v. Gape, 191 A.D.2d 549; LBV Props. v. Greenport Dev. Co., 188 A.D.2d 588), such as "waiver by the mortgagee, or estoppel, or bad faith, fraud, oppressive or unconscionable conduct on the [plaintiff's] part" (Ferlazzo v. Riley, 278 N.Y. 289, 292; Nassau Trust Co. v. Montrose Concrete Prods. Corp., 56 N.Y.2d 175, 183). Here, the appellants' conclusory and unsubstantiated assertions are not supported by competent evidence and are insufficient to defeat the plaintiff's motion (see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Marine Midland Bank v. Freedom Rd. Realty Assocs., supra; LBV Props. v. Greenport Dev. Co., supra). Balletta, J.P., O'Brien, Thompson and Ritter, JJ., concur.