Order unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum:
In this mortgage foreclosure action, Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. By producing the mortgage and the unpaid note, plaintiff met its initial burden of establishing entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and defendant failed to raise an issue of fact ( see, Metropolitan Distrib. Servs. v. DiLascio , 176 A.D.2d 312 ). We reject the contention of defendant that her "affidavit of non-signature" raised an issue of fact regarding the authenticity of her purported signatures on the note and mortgage. Each document on its face is properly subscribed and bears the acknowledgment of a notary public. "Defendant cannot raise a triable issue of fact * * * simply by alleging, in conclusory form, that the [signatures] were forgeries" ( State Bank of Albany v. McAuliffe , 97 A.D.2d 607, 608, appeal dismissed 61 N.Y.2d 758 ). There is a "presumption of due execution, which may be rebutted only upon a showing of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary" ( Spilky v. Bernard H. La Lone Jr., P. C ., 227 A.D.2d 741, 743 ; see, Demblewski v. Demblewski , 267 A.D.2d 1058 [decided Dec. 30, 1999]).