Carlstrand v. Kerwin

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in granting plaintiffs’ motion to renew and, upon renewal, considering the affidavits submitted by plaintiffs (see, Saferstein v Stark, 171 AD2d 856; Weisse v Kamhi, 129 AD2d 698). Because a fact issue existed, however, regarding the independent physical and emotional injuries sustained by plaintiff Anna Carlstrand as a result of the alleged negligence of defendants, Supreme Court properly permitted the third and fourth causes of…