Opinion
February 25, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Di Noto, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In support of its motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff established its case as a matter of law through the production of the unpaid promissory notes (see, Interman Indus. Prods. v R.S.M. Electron Power, 37 N.Y.2d 151; Ehrlich v American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26 N.Y.2d 255; Grasso v Shutts Agency, 132 A.D.2d 768; Gateway State Bank v ShangriLa Private Club for Women, 113 A.D.2d 791, affd 67 N.Y.2d 627; Seaman-Andwall Corp. v Wright Mach. Corp., 31 A.D.2d 136, affd 29 N.Y.2d 617). It was then incumbent upon the defendant Mondrone to demonstrate, by admissible evidence, the existence of a triable factual issue (see, Ihmels v Kahn, 126 A.D.2d 701; Abacus Real Estate Fin. Co. v P.A.R. Constr. Maintenance Corp., 115 A.D.2d 576; Badische Bank v Ronel Sys., 36 A.D.2d 763). The defendant failed to do so. Mangano, P.J., Brown, Sullivan, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.