Porter Nordby Howe LLP, Syracuse (Eric C. Nordby of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Smith, Sovik, Kendrick & Sugnet, P.C., Syracuse (Christopher F. Defrancesco of counsel), for defendants-respondents.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Anthony J. Paris, J.), entered April 19, 2018. The order granted the motion of defendants-respondents for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint against them.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion of defendants-respondents is denied, and the complaint against defendants-respondents is reinstated.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this medical malpractice action in connection with a surgical procedure performed upon plaintiff Eileen A. Gardiner. Supreme Court erred in granting the motion of defendants-respondents (defendants) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendants met their initial burden on their motion, we agree with plaintiffs that their medical expert's affidavit raised triable issues of fact in opposition (see Fay v Satterly, 158 AD3d 1220, 1221 [4th Dept 2018]). Where, as here, the "nonmovant's expert affidavit 'squarely opposes' the affirmation of the moving parties' expert, the result is 'a classic battle of the experts that is properly left to a jury for resolution' " (Mason v Adhikary, 159 AD3d 1438, 1439 [4th Dept 2018]). Present—Smith, J.P., Carni, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Winslow, JJ.