Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its breach of contract cause of action by tendering admissible evidence that it delivered oil and provided services to the defendant, for which the defendant did not pay ( see Boise Cascade Off. Prods. Corp. v Gilman Ciocia, Inc., 30 AD3d 454; Becker v Shore Drugs, 296 AD2d 515; Neuman Distribs. v Falak Pharm. Corp., 289 AD2d 310, 311; Drug Guild Distribs. v 3-9 Drugs, 277 AD2d 197, 198). The plaintiff also established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its cause of action for an account stated by demonstrating that the defendant failed to object to the invoices that the plaintiff sent to him in the ordinary course of business ( see American Express Centurion Bank v Williams, 24 AD3d 577, 578; Casa Redimix Concrete Corp. v MacQuesten Gen. Contr, Inc., 14 AD3d 641, 642; Neuman Distribs. v Jacobi Med. Ctr., 298 AD2d 568). The defendant's affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Boise Cascade Off. Prods. Corp. v Gilman Ciocia, Inc., 30 AD3d at 455; Neuman Distribs. v Jacobi Med. Ctr., 298 AD2d at 569; Becker v Shore Drugs, 296 AD2d at 515; Drug Guild Distribs. v 3-9 Drugs, 277 AD2d at 198).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Comments