CPLR R. 2106, CPLR R. 411

The papers submitted by petitioner to the Civil Court were insufficient on their face to warrant the granting of any relief (see SP Medical, P.C. v Country-Wide Ins. Co., 20 Misc 3d 126[A],
2008 NY Slip Op 51230[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]).
Petitioner submitted a document that was denominated an "Affirmation in
Support." The only document submitted in support of the petition was
one which was not affirmed "to be true under the penalties of perjury"
(CPLR 2106). Indeed, the attorney who signed the document merely
indicates that he "states as follows," which is insufficient under the
law (see Puntino v Chin, 288 AD2d 202 [2001]; Jones v Schmitt, 7 Misc 3d 47 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2005]; see also A.B. Med. Servs. PLLC v Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 11 Misc 3d 137[A],
2006 NY Slip Op 50504[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006]).
Accordingly, the document is insufficient as an affirmation (see SP Medical, P.C., 20 Misc 3d 126[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 51230[U]).

In view of the foregoing, the petition to vacate the master arbitrator's award should have [*2]been denied. Furthermore, upon denying the petition, the court is required, pursuant to CPLR 7511 (e), to confirm the award (see Matter of Exclusive Med. & Diagnostic v Government Empls. Ins. Co.,
306 AD2d 476 [2003]). While we do not reach the remaining contentions,
we note that a special proceeding should terminate in a judgment, not
an order (see CPLR 411)