Vayser v. Waldbaum, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The factual and procedural background of this case are set forth in Vayser v Waldbaum, Inc. (225 AD2d 761 [decided herewith]).
*761Although a motion to renew is generally based upon the discovery of material facts which were unknown to the movant at the time of the original motion (see, Chiarella v Quitoni, 178 AD2d 502), it is well settled that "[t]he requirement * * * is a flexible one, and a court, in its discretion, may grant renewal upon facts known to the moving party at the time of the original motion” (Karlin v Bridges, 172 AD2d 644, 645; CPLR 2221). Under the facts of this case, the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pulka v. EdelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Margolin v. FriedmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Kimbar v. EstisNew York Court of Appeals · 1956
- Chiarella v. QuitoniAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Karlin v. BridgesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Tishman Construction Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Strong v. Brookhaven Memorial Hospital Medical CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Garner v. LatimerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Comolli v. 81 & 13 Cortland Associates, L.P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.