Opinion
December 15, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The respondents, Staten Theatre Group and United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc. (hereinafter United Artists), established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with respect to their cross claims for common-law and contractual indemnity against the defendant Pepco Construction Corp. (hereinafter Pepco) ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. v. Belizon, 225 A.D.2d 527; Crawford v. L.S.S. Leasing Corp., 210 A.D.2d 451; Schumer v. Burtan, 208 A.D.2d 823; Matter of Maeder, 203 A.D.2d 464; Ramage v. Feore, 163 A.D.2d 286). In particular, the respondents submitted the affidavit of Hal Cleveland, executive vice president of United Artists, stating, inter alia, that the respondents did not direct, supervise, or control the performance of the work at issue. The only document submitted by Pepco in opposition to the motion was the affirmation of an attorney who lacked personal knowledge of the facts and who failed to specifically address the arguments advanced by the respondents, except to make conclusory assertions that further discovery was required ( see, Crawford v. L.S.S. Leasing Corp., supra, at 452). Under the circumstances presented, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents' motion ( see, McCabe v. Queensboro Farm Prods., 22 N.Y.2d 204, 208; see also, Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v. Austin Powder Co., 68 N.Y.2d 465, 470; McDermott v. City of New York, 50 N.Y.2d 211; Sikorski v. Springbrook Fire Dist., 225 A.D.2d 1041; Kavanaugh v. Marrano/Marc Equity Corp., 225 A.D.2d 1037; Gange v. Tilles Inv. Co., 220 A.D.2d 556, 558; Richardson v. Matarese, 206 A.D.2d 354, 355).
Pepco's remaining contentions are without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.