DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The defendants demonstrated their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence which showed that they did not create or have actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition which caused the infant plaintiff's injury (see Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836; Blaszczyk v. Riccio, 266 A.D.2d 491; Freeman v. Cobos, 240 A.D.2d 698).
The affidavit of the plaintiffs' expert was insufficient to defeat the defendants' motion for summary judgment because it was speculative, conclusory, and unsubstantiated (see Billordo v. E.P. Realty Assocs., 300 A.D.2d 523 [2d Dept, Dec. 23, 2002]; Rovegno v. Church of the Assumption, 268 A.D.2d 576; Ambrosio v. South Huntington Union Free School Dist., 249 A.D.2d 346). Accordingly, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, and the defendants' motion for summary judgment was properly granted (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320).
RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, FEUERSTEIN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.