Majority
The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the complaint. The plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof of the existence of the promissory note executed by the defendant and the defendant’s default in making payments pursuant to that note (see Verela v Citrus Lake Dev., Inc., 53 AD3d 574 , 575 [2008]; Levien v Allen, 52 AD3d 578 [2008]; Anand v Wilson, 32 AD3d 808 [2006]). In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to a bona fide defense (see Quest Commercial, LLC v Rovner, 35 AD3d 576 [2006]; Famolaro v Crest Offset, Inc., 24 AD3d 604 [2005]; Bank of N.Y. v Vega Tech. USA, LLC, 18 AD3d 678 [2005]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, his claim
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Mastro, J.P., Belen, Hall and Austin, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Verela v. Citrus Lake Development, Inc. 53 AD3d 574 at 575 p. 736
- Anand v. Wilson 32 AD3d 808 p. 736
- Quest Commercial, LLC v. Rovner 35 AD3d 576 p. 736
- Famolaro v. Crest Offset, Inc. 24 AD3d 604 p. 736
- Raico v. Concorde Funding Group 60 AD3d 834 at 836 p. 737