Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
"`[I]n moving for summary judgment in an action to foreclose a mortgage, a plaintiff establishes its case as a matter of law through the production of the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default'" ( Republic Natl. Bank of N.Y. v O'Kane, 308 AD2d 482, quoting Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812, 812; see Aames Funding Corp. v Houston, 44 AD3d 692, 693). Here, the plaintiff bank sustained its initial burden of demonstrating its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof of the existence of the note, mortgage, and consolidation agreement, and the defendants' default in payment ( see Mahopac Natl. Bank v Baisley, 244 AD2d 466, 467; Home Sav. Bank v Schorr Bros. Dev. Corp., 213 AD2d 512, 512-513; Zitel Corp. v Fonar Corp., 210 AD2d 221). The plaintiff established, on its motion for summary judgment, that the defendants took out two mortgages on the subject property which were consolidated to form a single lien in the amount of $522,200, and that the defendants defaulted on their obligations under the note and mortgage. Accordingly, it was incumbent upon the defendants to demonstrate, by admissible evidence, the existence of a triable issue of fact as to a bona fide defense ( see State Bank of Albany v Fioravanti, 51 NY2d 638, 647; Naugatuck Sav. Bank v Gross, 214 AD2d 549; Zitel Corp. v Fonar Corp., 210 AD2d 221). The defendants failed to raise such a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, summary judgment was properly granted to the plaintiff.
The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.