DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
After the defendant and third-party defendant made out prima facie cases for summary judgment, the plaintiff, in opposition to the motions, alleged for the first time that she was forced to walk through an automatic vehicle gate in a parking lot because of negligent snow removal.
The Supreme Court appropriately refused to consider the allegation. A plaintiff cannot defeat an otherwise proper motion for summary judgment by asserting a new theory of liability for negligence for the first time in opposition to the motion (see, Scanlon v. Stuyvesant Plaza, 195 A.D.2d 854; Alvarez v. Lindsay Park Hous. Corp., 175 A.D.2d 225). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the motions for summary judgment.
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.