President R.C.-St. Regis Management Co. v. Park Place Entertainment Corp.

300 A.D.2d 558, 751 N.Y.S.2d 880, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12744

This text of 300 A.D.2d 558 (President R.C.-St. Regis Management Co. v. Park Place Entertainment Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
President R.C.-St. Regis Management Co. v. Park Place Entertainment Corp., 300 A.D.2d 558, 751 N.Y.S.2d 880, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12744 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, defamation, breach of contract, and tortious interference with a contract, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), entered October 2, 2001, as denied their motion to compel the defendants to produce certain documents in response to their discovery demands, and (2) so much of an order of the same court, entered December 26, 2001, as denied their motion for leave to renew the motion to compel.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court properly declined to compel the defendants to comply with the plaintiffs’ request for production of documents created after the commencement of this action or relating to other casinos, since those documents are not material or necessary to the prosecution of the action (see Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403; Blagrove v Cox, 294 AD2d 526).

The plaintiffs’ motion for leave to renew was properly denied, since it was not based upon additional or material facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination (see Feldstein v Rounick, 295 AD2d 398; Williams v Fitzsimmons, 295 AD2d 342). In addition, the plaintiffs failed to offer a valid excuse for not submitting the additional facts upon their original motion (see Matter of Government Empls. Ins. Co. v Woney, 293 AD2d 539; LaRosa v Trapani, 271 AD2d 506). Smith, J.P., O’Brien, Krausman and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co.
235 N.E.2d 430 (New York Court of Appeals, 1968)
LaRosa v. Trapani
271 A.D.2d 506 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Government Employees Insurance v. Woney
293 A.D.2d 539 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Blagrove v. Cox
294 A.D.2d 526 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Williams v. Fitzsimmons
295 A.D.2d 342 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Feldstein v. Rounick
295 A.D.2d 398 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
300 A.D.2d 558, 751 N.Y.S.2d 880, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/president-rc-st-regis-management-co-v-park-place-entertainment-corp-nyappdiv-2002.