With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” Id. 56(c). Here, the relevant question requiring factual support is whether DBA’s contracts with debt collectors and law firms are extraterritorial or not. As indicated above, the answer to this question is extremely fact sensitive, resting on where the essential elements necessary for contract formation took place. The record, however, is bereft of such evidence. As defendants point out, Berman’s bald assertion that DBA’s contracts with debt collectors and law firms are entered into “outside of the State of New York” does little more than restate the legal conclusion that these contracts are extraterritorial. As a legal conclusion, it cannot support summary judgment. See Schwapp v. Town of Avon, 118 F.3d 106, 111 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); Suzy Phillips Originals, Inc. v. Coville,

A: holding affidavits must include competent evidence and affidavits are not competent if they fail to show a basis for actual person knowledge or if they state conclusions without the support of evidentiary facts
B: holding that district court properly refused to rely on affidavits to the extent that they contained only legal conclusions
C: holding prior to twombly that courts were not required to accept the truth of legal conclusions contained in a plaintiffs complaint
D: holding that an appellate court can affirm a district courts order on any basis for which there is a record sufficient to permit conclusions of law including grounds upon which the district court did not rely
B.