Legal Opinion

Town of Niagara v. City of Niagara Falls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 12, 1991No. Appeal No. 2PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion characterized by plaintiff as seeking “leave to reargue *572and/or renew”. We conclude that plaintiff’s motion is one to renew, and not one to reargue, because it was made on the ground of additional material facts not previously considered. The renewal of a motion should be denied where, as here, the movant "failed to provide a valid excuse for not submitting the additional evidence in the original application” (Monroe Dewey Partners v MDR Dev., 159 AD2d 949; see also, Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Foley v. RocheAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
  2. Monroe Dewey Partners v. MDR Development, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. New York State Division of Human Rights v. Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API