From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hayes, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.


Appeal from order insofar as it denied reargument unanimously dismissed and order affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court's denial of petitioner's motion insofar as it sought reargument is not properly before us because no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, Lindsay v Funtime, Inc., 184 A.D.2d 1036; Pennino v Lasersurge, Inc., 178 A.D.2d 939). The court properly denied the motion insofar as it sought renewal. The additional evidence supporting the motion was not newly discovered and petitioner did not provide a valid excuse for his failure to submit that evidence with the petition (see, Lindsay v Funtime, Inc., supra; Town of Niagara v City of Niagara Falls, 175 A.D.2d 571, 572).


Summaries of

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Case Details

Full title:NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, on Complaint of JOHN F. ELKO…

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

Date published: Nov 19, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
605 N.Y.S.2d 996