Court Opinion

ID: 3216313
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-06-23 13:09:37.972983+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:47.047674
License: Public Domain

OPINION OF THE COURT
 

  Memorandum.
 

  The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, by granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment dismissing defendants’ third affirmative defense, and, as so modified, affirmed and the certified question answered in the negative.
 

  Plaintiff met its initial burden of demonstrating its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing defendants’ third affirmative defense alleging that plaintiff breached the stipulation between the parties
  
   (see
  
  CPLR 3212 [b];
  
   Zuckerman v City of New York,
  
  49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Defendants’ submis
   
   *1111
   
  sions in opposition to plaintiffs motion failed to raise a material triable issue of fact
  
   (see
  
  CPLR 3212 [b];
  
   see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,
  
  68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).
 

  Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur; Chief Judge DiFiore taking no part.
 

  Order modified, without costs, by granting plaintiffs motion for summary judgment dismissing the third affirmative defense and, as so modified, affirmed and certified question answered in the negative, in a memorandum.