Domingez v. Zinnar

130 A.D.3d 414, 11 N.Y.S.3d 484

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: July 2, 2015
• Docket: 15627N 116709/06
• Status: Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered on or about March 25, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiffs-respondents’ counsel’s motion to confirm a referee’s report setting a charging lien in favor of counsel, and denied plaintiff Vasquez’s cross motion for renewal and reconsideration of counsel’s prior motion for a charging lien, unanimously affirmed with respect to counsel’s motion, and the appeal therefrom otherwise dismissed, without costs.

Vasquez’s cross motion seeking renewal and reconsideration is deemed a motion to reargue, since Vasquez did not point to any new fact that would change the prior determination (see Pullman v Silverman, 125 AD3d 562, 563 [1st Dept 2015]). Therefore, the denial of Vasquez’s cross motion is not appeal-able (id.).

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in confirming the Referee’s report, as the report is supported by the record (Those Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London v Occidental Gems, Inc., 11 NY3d 843, 845 [2008]). Concur— Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Renwick, Saxe and Feinman, JJ.