Order reversed, with costs, motion for renewal granted and, upon renewal, order entered July 16, 1982 vacated, and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment denied.
Defendants have established that their motion, denominated as one to reargue, was misdesignated and that Special Term should have treated it as one to renew based upon newly discovered evidence (see Estrow v Wilson,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
