Appeal by plaintiff, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (B. Baiter, J.), entered October 11, 2002, as denied its motion for summary judgment.

Order unanimously modified by granting plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to its first and second causes of action; as so modified, affirmed without costs.

In this action to recover damages against the corporate defendant based on a breach of a finance lease agreement, and against the individual defendant based on his guaranty of said agreement, plaintiff moved for summary judgment. Plaintiff met its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the lease agreement and proof of nonpayment (see Preferred Capital v PBK, — AD2d — [4th Dept, Oct. 2, 2003]; Canon Fin. Servs. v Medico Stationery Serv., 300 AD2d 66 [2002]). The burden then shifted to defendants to demonstrate by admissible evidence the existence of a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In our opinion, defendants failed to submit sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact and, as such, the lower court improperly denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment.
Decision Date: January 29, 2004