In an action to re
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of their motion for summary judgment, the defendants failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Questions of fact exist as to whether the defendants were negligent and, if so, whether their negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries allegedly sustained by the plaintiff Alicia Campis Dominguez (see Carew v Urological Surgeons of Long Is., 292 AD2d 484 [2002]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
The defendants’ remaining contention is without merit. Krausman, J.E, Mastro, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.