Opinion
August 31, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant sustained its initial burden of coming forward with admissible evidence to establish prima facie its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, GTF Mktg. v Colonial Aluminum Sales, 66 N.Y.2d 965, 967; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562; Hellyer v. Law Capitol, 124 A.D.2d 782). Therefore, the burden shifted to the plaintiffs, and it was incumbent upon them to tender evidence in admissible form to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact (see, Vermette v. Kenworth Truck Co., 68 N.Y.2d 714, 717; GTF Mktg. v Colonial Aluminum Sales, supra, at 968; Hellyer v. Law Capitol, supra, at 783). However, the proof presented by the plaintiffs in this case was patently insufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (see, Vermette v. Kenworth Truck Co., supra; Hellyer v. Law Capitol, supra). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Lawrence and Spatt, JJ., concur.