Tan Holding Corp. v. Wallace

OPINION OF THE COURT

Douglas E. Hoffman, J.

Respondents move for an award of attorney’s fees and for summary judgment as to their rent overcharge and excess se*424curity deposit counterclaims. Petitioner cross-moves for renewal pursuant to CPLR 2221 as to the court’s decision/order of November 13, 1998 (Tan Holding Corp. v Wallace, 178 Misc 2d 900) granting summary judgment in favor of respondents and dismissing the petition. As a basis for renewal, petitioner asserts the existence of evidence known and available at the time of the original motion, but not proffered for reasons petitioner does not…