Opinion
Submitted September 26, 2001.
October 15, 2001.
In an action for a judgment declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of the subject property, the defendant Anna Ruscito appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated October 3, 2000, as denied her motion for leave to reargue and renew the plaintiff's motion to strike her answer for failure to comply with court-ordered discovery.
Arnold J. Kaplan, Mineola, N.Y., for appellant.
Robert L. Folks Associates, LLP, Melville, N Y (Cynthia A. Kouril of counsel), for respondent.
Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of the appellant's 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 is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
A motion for leave to renew should be denied unless the moving party offers a reasonable excuse as to why the new facts were not submitted on the prior motion (see, CPLR 2221[e]; Palmer v. Toledo, 266 A.D.2d 268). The appellant failed to offer a reasonable justification for her failure to comply with discovery (see, Kilgore v. Rochdale Vil., 252 A.D.2d 516; Mayer v. McBrunigan Constr. Corp., 123 A.D.2d 606).
O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.