Opinion
May 21, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The second cause of action in the instant complaint apparently alleges a derivative cause of action against the respondents for waste and usurpation of a corporate opportunity. Specifically, the allegations of this second cause of action focus on the respondents' conduct with respect to a lease and a "right of first refusal" to purchase contained therein, concerning the premises and realty located at 4040 Hempstead Turnpike, Bethpage, New York. However, the record indicates that plaintiff failed to submit evidentiary proof in admissible form, sufficient to defeat the respondents' showing in support of their motion for summary judgment (Monteferrante v. New York City Fire Dept., 63 A.D.2d 576, affd 47 N.Y.2d 737; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). Accordingly, the order appealed from is affirmed. Mangano, P.J., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Sullivan, JJ., concur.