DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The defendant Olympia Mechanical Piping Heating Corp. (hereinafter Olympia) established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by adducing evidence that it did not negligently install a toilet in the plaintiff's apartment approximately 4 1/2 years before her accident ( see Dini v. Imperial Workwear Servs., 300 A.D.2d 279). In opposition to Olympia's prima facie showing, the plaintiff failed to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact. The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in rejecting the affidavit of a purported expert proffered by the plaintiff, since the plaintiff failed to identify the expert in pretrial disclosure, and served the affidavit after filing a note of issue and certificate of readiness attesting to the completion of discovery ( see Dawson v. Cafiero, 292 A.D.2d 488, 489; Ortega v. New York City Tr. Auth., 262 A.D.2d 470; Mankowski v. Two Park Co., 225 A.D.2d 673). In any event, the affidavit, which relied upon facts contradicted by the record, and which was speculative and conclusory, did not raise a triable issue of fact ( see Murphy v. Conner, 84 N.Y.2d 969, 972; Mestric v. Martinez Cleaning Co., 306 A.D.2d 449; Maggiotta v. Walsh, 306 A.D.2d 447).
We do not reach the plaintiff's remaining contention, which was raised for the first time on appeal ( see Gorenstein v. Debralaurie Realty Co., 280 A.D.2d 642).
The Supreme Court thus properly granted Olympia's motion for summary judgment.
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.