ENND v. KOPP

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the defendants established, through competent evidence, their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see Posokhov v Oselkin, 44 AD3d 921; Starr v Rogers, 44 AD3d 646, 648; see also Tessier v New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 177 AD2d 626). In opposition, the affidavit of the plaintif's undisclosed expert failed to raise a triable issue of fact, as it contained only conclusory and unsupported allegations ( see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324-325; Posokhov v Oselkin, 44 AD3d 921; Starr v Rogers, 44 AD3d at 648; Keevan v Rifkin, 41 AD3d 661, 662; Bumbaca v Bonanno, 39 AD3d 577, 578-579; Cai Qiang Li v Yang, 36 AD3d 642; Bowman v Chasky, 30 AD3d 552, 553; cf. Rivera v Anilesh, 8 NY3d 627).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit.