Rozina v Casa 74th Dev. LLC, 2011 NY Slip Op 07934 (1st Dept., 2011)
Defendants could not cure the defect in their moving papers by submitting their architect's affidavit with their reply (see Ford v Weishaus, 86 AD3d 421, 422 ).
Yeum v Clove Lakes Health Care & Rehabilitation Ctr., Inc., 2010 NY Slip Op 01930 (App. Div., 2nd, 2010)
Clove Lakes' failure to make a prima facie showing required the denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853). Clove Lakes' prima facie burden cannot be met by evidence submitted for the first time in its reply papers (see David v Bryon, 56 AD3d 413; Barrera v MTA Long Is. Bus, 52 AD3d 446).
And you can't submit an affirmation that does not actually affirm.
Niazov v Corlean Cab Corp., 2010 NY Slip Op 01941 (App. Div., 2nd, 2010)
The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident (see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 98 NY2d 345; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957). In support of their motion, the defendants relied upon, inter alia, the report of an orthopedic surgeon who examined the plaintiff. The report was without any probative value since he failed to affirm the contents of his report under the penalties of perjury, as required by CPLR 2106 (see Magro v He Yin Huang, 8 AD3d 245; Slavin v Associates Leasing, 273 AD2d 372; Baron v Murray, 268 AD2d 495; Cwiekala v Siddon, 267 AD2d 193). Without the report, the defendants could not meet their burden on the motion.
Since the defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to consider whether the papers submitted by the plaintiff in opposition were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Gaccione v Krebs, 53 AD3d 524; Coscia v 938 Trading Corp., 283 AD2d 538).
In both of these cases the motions were denied without needing to look at the opposition papers. Bad papers get motions denied, even if the opposition papers are horrible. Even if there are no opposition papers. The movant still has it's burden.
Finally, parties can't affirm, no matter how hard they swear under penalties of perjury.