DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The plaintiff Mary Kershis alleges that she sustained injuries when she tripped on a defect in a sidewalk located at the corner of 44th Street and Queens Boulevard in Queens County. Once the defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York City Transit Authority, and NAB Construction Corp. made a prima facie showing that they were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, the burden shifted to the plaintiffs to produce sufficient evidentiary proof in admissible form to show that a triable issue of fact existed (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). The plaintiffs' bald assertion that the respondents could have been involved in creating the alleged sidewalk defect was insufficient to show the existence of a triable issue of fact on this issue. Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the mere hope by the plaintiffs that they might be able to uncover some evidence during further discovery was insufficient to deny summary judgment to the respondents (see CPLR 3212[f]; Abbenante v. Tyree Co., 228 A.D.2d 529; Jones v. Gameray, 153 A.D.2d 550).
The plaintiffs' contention that the respondents should have been denied summary judgment and their answer stricken based on spoliation of evidence is without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, SMITH and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.