Town of Niagara v. City of Niagara Falls

175 A.D.2d 571
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 12, 1991·No. Appeal No. 2·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion characterized by plaintiff as seeking “leave to reargue [572] and/or renew”. We conclude that plaintiff’s motion is one to renew, and not one to reargue, because it was made on the ground of additional material facts not previously considered. The renewal of a motion should be denied where, as here, the movant "failed to provide a valid excuse for not submitting the additional evidence in the original application” (Monroe Dewey Partners v MDR Dev., 159 AD2d 949; see also, Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 568). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J. — Renewal.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Lawton, Lowery and Davis, JJ.

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

Town of Niagara v. City of Niagara Falls, 175 A.D.2d 571 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

175 A.D.2d 571 (Town of Niagara v. City of Niagara Falls) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

New York State Division of Human Rights v. Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corp.
198 A.D.2d 761 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)