Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The appellant's motion for summary judgment was made well after the 120-day limit imposed by CPLR 3212 (a) and he failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay in making the motion. Therefore, the motion was properly denied ( see Miceli v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 3 NY3d 725; Brill v. City of New York, 2 NY3d 648).
In the order appealed from by the defendant third-party plaintiff, the Supreme Court also denied the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on his cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) insofar as asserted against the appellant, finding that there exist issues of fact. The plaintiff did not file a notice of appeal, however, and we decline the plaintiff's invitation to nevertheless search the record and award him summary judgment ( see Dunham v. Hilco Constr. Co., 89 NY2d 425), as we agree with the Supreme Court's assessment of the merits of the plaintiff's motion.