Summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213 was properly granted premised upon each defendant's expressly unconditional and absolute guarantees (see, City of New York v. Clarose Cinema Corp., 256 A.D.2d 69, 681 N.Y.S.2d 251). Each defendant validly waived all defenses (see, e.g., Banco do Estado de Sao Paulo S.A. v. Mendes Junior Intl. Co., 249 A.D.2d 137, 138), and, in any event, none of the defendants submitted evidentiary proof that their guarantees had been fraudulently induced (cf., Norstar Bank of Upstate New York v. Off. Control Sys., Inc., 165 A.D.2d 265, 267,appeal dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 1110). Renewal was properly denied; the circumstance that claims may exist between plaintiff and unrelated third parties was insufficient to defeat plaintiff's right to judgment upon defendants' guarantees (see, Bank of India v. Sanghvi, 224 A.D.2d 347). We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Motion seeking to strike respondent's brief and for other related relief denied.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.