Opinion
February 10, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
We find that the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the plaintiff on her claim for unpaid wages and commissions (see, Labor Law § 191 [c]; § 193). Contrary to the defendants' contentions, the papers submitted by the plaintiff established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853). To the extent that the defendants disputed the plaintiff's assertions, their contentions were bald and conclusory in nature, and thus insufficient to create material issues of fact for trial. It is well settled that a shadowy semblance of an issue or bald, conclusory allegations, even if believable, are insufficient (see, Andre v. Pomeroy, 35 N.Y.2d 361, 364; Capelin Assocs. v. Globe Mfg. Corp., 34 N.Y.2d 338, 342; see also, Pizzi v. Bradlees Div., 172 A.D.2d 504; Assing v United Rubber Supply Co., 126 A.D.2d 590). Thompson, J.P., Harwood, Rosenblatt and Eiber, JJ., concur.