Opinion
April 20, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted and the third-party complaint is dismissed.
We find no triable issue was raised by the third-party plaintiff with respect to ownership by Hertz of a vehicle allegedly involved in the accident (see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 N.Y.2d 851; Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 N.Y.2d 1065; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). The Hertz Corporation's attorney's affirmation was a proper vehicle for the submission of documents which showed that the assertions of the defendant third-party plaintiff Command Bus Company, Inc., that the vehicle in the accident was a Hertz truck, were merely conclusory (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, supra, at 563). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.