GRALNIK v. BRIGHTON BEACH ASSOCIATES

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.