Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the argument raised by the appellants-respondents, the Supreme Court properly considered the contents of a signed deposition transcript in reaching its determination that the existence of issues of fact precluded an award of partial summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 563; cf., Krupp v. Aetna Life Cas. Co., 103 A.D.2d 252). We have also considered whether the plaintiff's arguments warrant the granting of partial summary judgment to it, and we conclude that such relief is not warranted. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.