Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, that branch of the cross motion which was for summary judgment insofar as asserted against the defendant Robert H. Kramer is granted, the complaint is dismissed as against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

In support of that branch of the cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, the appellant demonstrated, prima facie, that he had not departed from good and accepted standards of medical practice in his treatment of the plaintiff's decedent ( see, Gehres v. Central Gen. Hosp., 236 A.D.2d 587; Schaefer v. Marchiano, 193 A.D.2d 664). Among other things, the appellant established that on the single occasion that he treated the plaintiff's decedent, he obtained her medical history, conducted an unremarkable manual examination of her breasts, referred her for a mammogram, and later reviewed the radiological report which indicated that no abnormalities were present. In opposition, the plaintiff's expert offered only conclusory opinions which did not refute the appellant's prima facie showing, and which were insufficient to demonstrate the existence of genuine issues of fact ( see, Leon v. Southside Hosp., 227 A.D.2d 384; Marinaccio v. Society of N.Y. Hosp., 224 A.D.2d 595; Guida v. Hsu, 187 A.D.2d 485). Accordingly, that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him should have been granted.

Miller, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.