Brodie v. Global Asset Recovery, Inc.

12 A.D.3d 391, 783 N.Y.S.2d 832, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13295
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brodie v. Global Asset Recovery, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 12 A.D.3d 390

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated March 25, 2004, as denied that branch of their motion which was for leave to renew their prior motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, which was determined by order of the same court dated November 18, 2003.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ assertion, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of their motion which was for leave to renew because it was not based upon new facts which would change the court’s prior determination (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Allied Intl. Dev. v Barson Composite Corp., 2 AD3d 552 [2003]; Zuccarini v Ziff Davis Media, 306 AD2d 404 [2003]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Schmidt, Mastro and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Brodie v. Global Asset Recovery, Inc., 12 A.D.3d 391, 783 N.Y.S.2d 832, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13295 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

12 A.D.3d 391 (Brodie v. Global Asset Recovery, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Allied International Development, Ltd. v. Barson Composite Corp.
2 A.D.3d 552 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Zuccarini v. Ziff-Davis Media, Inc.
306 A.D.2d 404 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)