Even though the evidence submitted by plaintiffs in support of the motion was available at the time they first moved to restore the action to the calendar, the IAS Court properly considered it, inasmuch as it conclusively established that plaintiffs' first motion was timely made within one year, which was plaintiffs' position on their first motion to renew and reargue albeit with proof deemed inadequate by the IAS Court (see, Martinez v Hudson Armored Car &...
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.
