Opinion
December 7, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hall, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
After the plaintiffs made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, the defendant's vague and conclusory assertions in the affidavit of its President to the effect that the plaintiffs did not render any services pursuant to the subject consulting agreement, and that the plaintiffs worked against the best interests of the defendant, were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562; All Indus. Real Estate Corp. v. Northgate Plaza, 186 A.D.2d 103, 104; Marine Midland Bank v. Dino Artie's Automatic Transmission Co., 168 A.D.2d 610, 611).
We find no merit to the defendant's remaining contentions.
O'Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.