Ordered that the order dated November 2, 2001, is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion, in effect, for leave to renew is denied, and the order dated August 20, 2001, is reinstated.
The Supreme Court improperly denominated the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 2221 as one for reargument. The plaintiff's motion was based on facts not offered on the prior motion (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]), and is properly denominated as a motion for leave to renew. The...
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.