Opinion
December 7, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty, J.).
Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof denying the cross motion of the defendant Robert S. Leathers for summary judgment and substituting therefor a provision granting the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the complaint is dismissed.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contentions, the defendant Town of Oyster Bay demonstrated its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and thus the Supreme Court properly granted its motion for summary judgment ( see, Pinzon v. City of New York, 197 A.D.2d 680). The plaintiff wholly failed to come forward with any persuasive evidence that the Town of Oyster Bay breached any relevant duty concerning the maintenance of the subject playground apparatus that proximately caused the infant plaintiff's injuries. Indeed, no sworn expert opinion was proffered to support the plaintiffs' claim of negligence ( see, Hagan v. General Motors Corp., 194 A.D.2d 766; cf., Dash v. City of New York, 236 A.D.2d 579). Moreover, the defendant Robert S. Leathers, the architect who designed the playground, likewise demonstrated his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and thus his motion for summary judgment is granted ( see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.
Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.