Opinion
February 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court did in fact base its judgment on the proposition that the sale of a computer software package is a sale of a good controlled by the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code ( see, e.g., Communications Groups v. Warner Communications, 138 Misc.2d 80). The court did not err in granting the defendant's motion since there was a complete failure of proof by the plaintiff on the issue of damages for breach of warranty ( see, UCC 2-315, 2-714).
The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit ( see, Napoli v. Canada Dry Bottling Co., 166 A.D.2d 696; Bertan v. Richmond Mem. Hosp. Health Ctr., 106 A.D.2d 362).
Sullivan, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.