Plaintiff next contends that the court erred in denying his request for an adverse inference charge for an alleged missing bar receipt. A party seeking an adverse inference charge based on an opposing party's failure to produce a document "must make a prima facie showing that the document in question actually exists, that it is under the opponent's control, and that there is no reasonable explanation for failing to produce it" ( Hutchinson v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. , 172 A.D.3d 1035, 1036-1037, 101 N.Y.S.3d 441 [2d Dept. 2019] ; seeJae Duk Ahn v. Kyong Koo Kang , 192 A.D.3d 994, 995, 140 N.Y.S.3d 773 [2d Dept. 2021] ; State of New York v. 158th St. & Riverside Dr. Hous. Co., Inc. , 100 A.D.3d 1293, 1295-1296, 956 N.Y.S.2d 196 [3d Dept. 2012], lv denied 20 N.Y.3d 858, 2013 WL 452396 [2013] ). The court properly denied plaintiff's request inasmuch as he failed to make a prima facie showing that the receipt in question actually existed (seeJae Duk Ahn , 192 A.D.3d at 995, 140 N.Y.S.3d 773 ).