Opinion
July 22, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff brought the present action to recover payment on promissory notes which were guaranteed by the defendants. The plaintiff established a prima facie case by proving the existence and genuineness of the subject notes and the defendants' failure to make payments thereunder ( see, East N.Y. Sav. Bank v Baccaray, 214 A.D.2d 601, 602; Bennell Hanover Assocs. v Neilson, 215 A.D.2d 710, 711; Naugatuck Sav. Bank v. Gross, 214 A.D.2d 549; First Interstate Credit Alliance v. Sokol, 179 A.D.2d 583, 584). In order to preclude the plaintiff from enforcing the terms of the note, the burden shifted to the defendants to establish by admissible evidence the existence of a triable issue of fact or a meritorious defense (see, Bennell Hanover Assocs. v Neilson, supra; East N.Y. Sav. Bank v. Baccaray, supra; Naugatuck Sav. Bank v. Gross, supra). The defendants' assertion that they did not have to make payment on the notes because of lack of consideration was merely an unsupported conclusory allegation which was insufficient to defeat the plaintiff's motion ( see, Bennell Hanover Assocs. v. Neilson, supra; Ihmels v. Kahn, 126 A.D.2d 701). Rosenblatt, J.P., Sullivan, Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.