Opinion
January 15, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The court properly granted the defendant Krieger's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) insofar as it is asserted against him. The conclusory allegations submitted in support of the plaintiffs' assertions of economic duress and overreaching were not supported by evidentiary facts sufficient to present a triable issue regarding the validity of the release (see, Ermco Erectors v. Grand Iron Works, 93 A.D.2d 878, affd 60 N.Y.2d 634). Kunzeman, J.P., Balletta, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.