IN RE TNT PETROLEUM

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant's contention, it was proper for the petitioner to bring a summary proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5225 (b), rather than a plenary action pursuant to article 10 of the Debtor and Creditor Law, to set aside allegedly fraudulent conveyances ( see Matter of WBP Cent. Assoc., LLC v DeCola, 50 AD3d 693, 694; O'Brien-Kreitzberg Assoc., v K.P., Inc., 218 AD2d 519, 520; Planned Consumer Mktg. v Coats Clark, 127 AD2d 355, 371-372, affd 71 NY2d 442; Gelbard v Esses, 96 AD2d 573, 575).

In a summary proceeding, a court is authorized to "make a summary determination upon the pleadings, papers and admissions to the extent that no triable issues of fact are raised" (CPLR 409 [b]; see Matter of Bahar v Schwartzreich, 204 AD2d 441, 443; Matter of Big Z Car Wash Corp. v Moon Ja Oh, 149 AD2d 418, 419; Matter of Garofano v State of New York, 122 AD2d 209, 210). Here, the petitioner satisfied its prima facie burden and, in opposition, the appellant failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see CPLR 5225 [b]; Debtor and Creditor Law §§ 273, 275; Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation Fin., 82 NY2d 135, 141; John John, LLC v Exit 63 Dev., LLC, 35 AD3d 540, 541; 9 E. 38th St. Assoc., v Feher Assoc., 226 AD2d 167; Kowalski v Knox, 293 AD2d 892, 893). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition.