From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gildston v. Schechter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 1996
233 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

November 18, 1996.

In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered May 9, 1995, which denied her motion, in effect, for reargument of a prior motion to vacate a judgment in the action in favor of the defendant.

Before: Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Thompson and McGinity, JJ.


Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument.

Although the plaintiff denominated her motion as one for renewal, a reading of the papers submitted in support of the motion reveals that it was actually one in the nature of reargument. All of the facts submitted in support of the motion were available and known to the plaintiff at the time of the submission of the original motion, and she failed to raise any new facts which were previously unavailable to her ( see, Mgrditchian v Donato, 141 AD2d 513; Syracuse Bros, v Darcy, 127 AD2d 588; Galaxy Export v Bedford Textile Prods., 89 AD2d 576). Since no appeal lies from an order denying reargument, the appeal must be dismissed ( see, DeFreitas v Board of Educ., 129 AD2d 672).


Summaries of

Gildston v. Schechter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 1996
233 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Gildston v. Schechter

Case Details

Full title:PHYLLIS GILDSTON, Individually and as Assignee of HAROLD GILDSTON…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 18, 1996

Citations

233 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
650 N.Y.S.2d 605

Citing Cases

Polanco v. City of New York

efendant Louis Magrino lost control of his New York City Department of Sanitation truck and collided into the…

Matter of Schlecter v. County of Nassau

The Supreme Count providently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioners' application for leave to…