Opinion
December 8, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff demonstrated that he gave an engagement ring to the defendant in contemplation of their marriage. Thus, the Supreme Court was correct in awarding judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the recovery of the engagement ring or its value after the termination of their engagement ( see, Civil Rights Law § 80-b; Gaden v. Gaden, 29 N.Y.2d 80). The defendant's bald, conclusory allegation that she does not know the whereabouts of the ring is insufficient to defeat the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Freedman v. Chemical Constr. Corp., 43 N.Y.2d 260, 264; Ehrlich v. American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26 N.Y.2d 255, 259).
Mangano, P.J., Copertino, Joy, and Luciano, JJ., concur.