Opinion
March 3, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hellenbrand, J.).
Order affirmed, with costs.
Special Term properly denied the appellant's motion to dismiss the petition, pursuant to either CPLR 3211 (a) (7) or 3212. The petition, together with the petitioner's affidavit in opposition to the motion, is sufficient to withstand dismissal pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7). "[A]ffidavits may be used freely to preserve inartfully pleaded, but potentially meritorious, claims" (Rovello v. Orofino Realty Co., 40 N.Y.2d 633, 635). In addition, the affidavits submitted by the parties raise questions of fact with respect to the petitioner's cause of action, pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1104-a, thereby warranting denial of summary judgment in favor of the appellant (see, Matter of Mintz [Astoria Holding Corp.], 113 A.D.2d 803). Bracken, J.P., Niehoff, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.