Opinion
2002-06270
Argued May 6, 2003.
June 2, 2003.
In an action, inter alia, to recover interest due on promissory notes, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Werner, J.), entered June 20, 2002, which, upon the granting of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and upon the denial of its cross motion, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $32,687.50.
Eaton Van Winkle, New York, N.Y. (Kathryn L. Bedke and Alexander Tripp of counsel), for appellant.
Bijesse Belford, St. James, N.Y. (John L. Belford, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, SONDRA MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover interest due on seven promissory notes issued by the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that he and his mother owned the notes as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, and that his mother died, leaving him the sole owner. In the order appealed from, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff judgment for certain interest due and owing on the notes. We affirm.
In opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie demonstration of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Matter of Kleinberg v. Heller, 38 N.Y.2d 836; Gotte v. Long Island Trust Co., 133 A.D.2d 212). Further, the defendant did not establish that facts essential to oppose the motion were within the exclusive knowledge of the plaintiff (see CPLR 3212[f]; Halpern Dev. Venture v. Board of Trustees of Vil. of N. Tarrytown, 222 A.D.2d 652).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
RITTER, J.P., SMITH, S. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.