Santana v. Sterling
Opinion of the Court
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Linda J. Priest appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated March 9, 2000, as upon, in effect, granting re-argument, adhered to that portion of a prior order of the same court, dated October 29, 1999, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her.
Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant previously appealed from the order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 29, 1999, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her (App Div Docket No.
We note that the Supreme Court improperly characterized the appellant’s motion as one for renewal and reargument. Since the new fact on which renewal was based was available to the appellant when she submitted her original motion, it did not constitute a proper ground for renewal (see, CPLR 2221; Kirkpatrick v State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 255 AD2d 363). Thus, the motion was solely a motion to reargue. Mangano, P. J., S. Miller, McGinity, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.