DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
On this motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5), the appellant met his initial burden of establishing prima facie that the time to commence an action against him had expired. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to "`aver evidentiary facts' establishing that the case falls within an exception to the Statute of Limitations" (Assad v. City of New York, 238 A.D.2d 456, 457, quoting Siegel v. Wank, 183 A.D.2d 158). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in denying the appellant's motion for summary judgment (see, Glamm v. Allen, 57 N.Y.2d 87; Goicoechea v. Law Offs. of Stephen R. Kihl, 234 A.D.2d 507; Tal-Spons Corp. v. Nurnberg, 213 A.D.2d 395).