
    DIENER & SHAPIRO, P.A., Appellant, v. The REUBEN H. DONNELLEY CORPORATION, a corporation, t/a Donnelley Information Publishing, Appellee.
    No. 90-1649.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Feb. 26, 1991.
    Rehearing Denied April 24, 1991.
    Diener & Shapiro, North Miami Beach, and Mark B. Judson and Michael A. Van-detty, Miami, for appellant.
    Haley Sinagra & Perez, and Rhonda Hollander, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
    Before NESBITT, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

In support of its motion for summary judgment in the amount of $15,004.08 for professional services rendered pursuant to a contract, the plaintiff filed a sworn affidavit of its corporate officer.' No doubt is created as to the truthfulness of that affidavit by any opposing affidavits, business records, or deposition testimony. The defendant’s conclusory pleadings of affirmative defenses are not supported by a factual showing. On this record we must affirm the trial judge’s conclusions that there are no genuine issues of material fact, Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985), and that the affirmative defenses are legally insufficient. Tippett v. Frank, 238 So.2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970).

Affirmed.

NESBITT and FERGUSON, JJ., concur.

COPE, Judge

(dissenting).

It was plaintiff’s burden to demonstrate the absence of a disputed issue of material fact with respect to plaintiff’s claim and with respect to defendant’s affirmative defenses. At deposition the plaintiff’s corporate representative was unable to answer numerous questions about the computation of defendant’s account. The parties agree that there was an accord and satisfaction as to the first contract year, but disagree on the amount. I would reverse the summary judgment, but without prejudice to renew the motion on a more complete record.  