Opinion
No. 2013–1618KC.
03-03-2016
Opinion
ORDERED that so much of the appeal as is from the portion of the order that denied the branch of plaintiff's motion seeking reargument is dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order, insofar as reviewed, is affirmed, without costs.
In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which denied its motion for leave to reargue and renew its opposition to defendant's prior motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
So much of the appeal as is from the portion of the order that denied the branch of plaintiff's motion seeking reargument is dismissed, as no appeal lies from that portion of the order (see Ireland v. Wilenzik, 296 A.D.2d 771, 773 [2002] ; see also Gosek v. Lunt Theatre Co., 89 AD3d 418, 418 [2011] ; Arab Am. Found. v. Naber, 260 A.D.2d 588 [1999] ; Neff v. Steven Schwartzapfel, P.C., 254 A.D.2d 137 [1998] ).
Contrary to plaintiff's argument, Alev Med. Supply, Inc. v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (36 Misc.3d 132[A], 2012 N.Y. Slip Op 51294[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2012] ), decided after the determination of defendant's prior motion, did not constitute a change in the law (see e.g. Russell v. New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 11 AD3d 668 [2004] ; Magic Recovery Med. & Surgical Supply Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 27 Misc.3d 67 [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2010] ; A.B. Med. Servs. PLLC v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 9 Misc.3d 19 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2005] ). Thus, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that there had been a change in the law that would alter the prior determination (see CPLR 2221[e][2] ), and the branch of plaintiff's motion seeking leave to renew was properly denied (see Jackson v. Westminster House Owners Inc., 52 AD3d 404 [2008] ).
Accordingly, the order, insofar as reviewed, is affirmed.
ELLIOT, J.P., PESCE and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.