Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Reginald A. Boddie, J.), entered August 14, 2012, deemed from a judgment of the same court entered October 22, 2012 (see CPLR 5501 [c]). The judgment, entered pursuant to the August 14, 2012 order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,396.99.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. A judgment was subsequently entered, from which the appeal is deemed to have been taken (see CPLR 5501 [c]).

On appeal, MVAIC argues that plaintiff's assignor failed to exhaust his remedies before seeking to recover from MVAIC. However, MVAIC failed to proffer any evidence in admissible form establishing that, on the date of the accident, the assignor would have been entitled to recover first-party no-fault benefits pursuant to an existing automobile insurance policy. "Although hearsay evidence may be considered in opposition to a motion for summary judgment, such evidence alone is not sufficient to defeat the motion" (Feinberg v Sanz, 115 AD3d 705 [2014]; see Weinstein v Nicolosi, 117 AD3d 1036 [2014). As a result, MVAIC failed to raise a triable issue of fact, let alone establish its entitlement to summary judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Aliotta and Solomon, JJ., concur.