From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clarke v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Aug 1, 2012
98 A.D.3d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-08-1

Justin CLARKE, et al., appellants, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, respondent.

George M. Gavalas, Mineola, N.Y., for appellants. Bruno, Gerbino & Soriano, LLP, Melville, N.Y. (Mitchell L. Kaufman of counsel), for respondent.


George M. Gavalas, Mineola, N.Y., for appellants. Bruno, Gerbino & Soriano, LLP, Melville, N.Y. (Mitchell L. Kaufman of counsel), for respondent.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an insurance contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated February 24, 2011, which denied their motion, in effect, for leave to renew and reargue their prior motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 7, 2009, granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon their default in opposing the motion, which had been denied in an order of the same court dated October 7, 2010.

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order dated February 24, 2011, as denied that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was for leave to reargue is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order dated February 24, 2011, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was for leave to renew their prior motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 7, 2009, granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon the plaintiffs' default in opposing the motion. The plaintiffs failed to present any explanation, much less a reasonable justification, for their failure to present certain alleged new facts on their prior motion ( seeCPLR 2221[e][3]; Dervisevic v. Dervisevic, 89 A.D.3d 785, 787, 932 N.Y.S.2d 347;Zito v. Jastremski, 84 A.D.3d 1069, 1071, 925 N.Y.S.2d 91;Ravnikar v. Skyline Credit–Ride, Inc., 79 A.D.3d 1118, 1120, 913 N.Y.S.2d 339).

ANGIOLILLO, J.P., ENG, LOTT and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Clarke v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Aug 1, 2012
98 A.D.3d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Clarke v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:Justin CLARKE, et al., appellants, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Aug 1, 2012

Citations

98 A.D.3d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
948 N.Y.S.2d 915
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 5795

Citing Cases

Joseph v. Simmons

ased upon new facts, not offered on the prior motion, that would change the prior determination, and the…

Fales v. Fales

ORDERED that the order dated August 3, 2011, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further, ORDERED…