
    [619 NE2d 400, 601 NYS2d 463]
    Charles Ayotte et al., Respondents, v Francis P. Gervasio et al., Defendants, and Joseph W. Le Febvre et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)
    Decided June 15, 1993
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Saul Aronson, Albany, and Francis E. Lehner for appellants.
    
      DeLorenzo, Gordon, Pasquariello, Weiskopf & Harding, P. C., Schenectady (Marshall P. Richer of counsel), for respondents.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the negative.

"[T]he proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact” (Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). The "[failure to make such prima facie showing requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers” (id., at 324). Here, in support of their summary judgment motion, movants merely assert that defendant’s negligent operation of his vehicle was the sole proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries and that no triable issues of fact existed. These conclusory assertions are insufficient to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, etc.  