Case Name: Harvest Moon, Inc., Appellant, v. Robert Arochas et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2000-03-21
Citations: 270 A.D.2d 138
Docket Number: 
Parties: Harvest Moon, Inc., Appellant, v Robert Arochas et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 270
Pages: 138–138

Head Matter:
Harvest Moon, Inc., Appellant, v Robert Arochas et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.
[706 NYS2d 308]

Opinion:
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered March 29, 1999, which granted defendants-respondents' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for a default judgment on their counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
On a motion for summary judgment, once the proponent has demonstrated, prima facie, entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, it becomes the burden of the opponent to present admissible evidence showing the existence of a triable issue of fact. Mere conclusions are insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (Plantamura v Penske Truck Leasing, 246 AD2d 347, 348). Here, while defendants met their burden, plaintiff, in opposition, offered only self-serving conclusory assertions of breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Nor did plaintiff show a reasonable excuse for its failure to timely reply to defendants' counterclaims. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.