Opinion
June 5, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robbins, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Summary judgment was properly granted in this case, as the third-party defendants proffered sufficient evidence to demonstrate that no triable issues of fact existed, and the third-party plaintiff's papers in opposition were insufficient to demonstrate otherwise (see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Pirozzolo v Dimeo, 141 A.D.2d 810). We reject the third-party plaintiff's assertion that there exists an issue of fact as to whether the third-party defendants discharged petroleum for which the third-party plaintiff had assumed responsibility. Even if any of the third-party defendants had suffered gas leaks at their respective stations, there is no evidence indicating that any alleged contaminants from these leaks could have affected the third-party plaintiff's site.
We have reviewed the third-party plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Balletta, J.P., Miller, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.