MITSUBISHI TR. BANKING v. HOUSING SERV

Summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3213 was appropriate under the circumstances presented herein. The notes at issue constitute instruments for the payment of money only. Plaintiff established that the notes were duly executed and that defendant defaulted in its obligation to pay thereunder ( see, Seaman-Andwall Corp. v Wright Mach. Corp., 31 A.D.2d 136, 137, affd 29 N.Y.2d 617). While defendant raises possible defenses and counterclaims concerning fraud, contract modification, contract breach and lack of consideration, these allegations either are unsubstantiated, are irrelevant to the subject notes, or create issues which are separate and severable from plaintiff's claim under the notes and do not serve to defeat CPLR 3213 summary judgment treatment ( see, Phillips v. Cioffi, 204 A.D.2d 94, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 810; Vinciguerra v. Northside Partnership, 188 A.D.2d 861).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.