Opinion
January 28, 1999.
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.).
In this product liability action, the motion of defendant manufacturers for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly granted in light of defendants' uncontroverted showing that there had been significant post-sale modifications to their product, and in light of the record evidence compellingly supportive of their further contention that those modifications, rather than the original product design, proximately caused plaintiff's injuries ( see, Amatulli v. Delhi Constr. Corp., 77 N.Y.2d 525, 532; Rios v. Minster Mach. Co., 243 A.D.2d 399). The conclusory statements of plaintiffs' expert were insufficient to raise a triable issue as to whether plaintiff's harm was in fact substantially attributable to the alleged design defect.
Concur — Williams, J.P., Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.