Opinion
2013-03-19
Alastair ONGLINGSWAN, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC, et al., Defendants, Adam Plotch, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Paula A. Miller P.C., Smithtown (Paula A. Miller of counsel), for appellants. Felix Shneiderovsky, PC, Brooklyn (Felix Shneiderovsky of counsel), for respondent.
Paula A. Miller P.C., Smithtown (Paula A. Miller of counsel), for appellants. Felix Shneiderovsky, PC, Brooklyn (Felix Shneiderovsky of counsel), for respondent.
ANDRIAS, J.P., FRIEDMAN, DeGRASSE, FREEDMAN, ABDUS–SALAAM, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered October 4, 2011, which granted plaintiff's motion to renew and reargue prior motions for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion to renew and reargue denied.
Although plaintiff's motion for reargument was untimely, the court had discretion to reconsider its prior order ( see Kleinser v. Astarita, 61 A.D.3d 597, 598, 878 N.Y.S.2d 28 [1st Dept. 2009] ). In any event, the motion should have been denied because plaintiff sought to improperly advance new theories that had not been set forth on the initial motion ( see DeSoignies v. Cornasesk House Tenants' Corp., 21 A.D.3d 715, 718, 800 N.Y.S.2d 679 [1st Dept. 2005] ). The motion to renew also should have been denied, given the absence of any justification for not submitting the purportedly new evidence on the initial motion ( see James v. 1620 Westchester Ave., LLC, ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.2d ––––, 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 00807, *4 [1st Dept. 2013] ). Further, the circumstances did not warrant renewal in the interest of justice ( cf. Garner v. Latimer, 306 A.D.2d 209, 210, 761 N.Y.S.2d 657 [1st Dept. 2003] ).