Opinion
December 18, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants dismissing the complaint since they proffered sufficient evidence to demonstrate that no triable issues of fact existed ( see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). The court correctly determined that the delivery of the defendants' "blanket order" awarding the plaintiff a transportation contract was a precondition to the formation of a binding agreement ( see, Matter of Hendrickson Bros. v County of Suffolk, 58 A.D.2d 602, vacated on other grounds 75 A.D.2d 1031, after remittitur 69 A.D.2d 904, affd 51 N.Y.2d 1003; see also, 27 N.Y. Jur 2d, Counties, Towns, and Municipal Corporations, § 1209; Scheck v Francis, 26 N.Y.2d 466). This precondition was not met. Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.