Opinion
March 1, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.).
Ordered that the order entered August 27, 1990, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaints is denied, and the complaints are reinstated; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the order entered April 10, 1991, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, Mucciola v. City of New York, 177 A.D.2d 553; Wodecki v. Carty, 167 A.D.2d 398; Huttner v McDaid, 151 A.D.2d 547).
Contrary to the findings of the Supreme Court, we conclude that the motion papers and the documentary evidence contained in the record raised triable issues of fact concerning the intent of the plaintiff and the defendant Lawrence Chiulli at the time they entered into the subject conveyance and mortgage agreement. Similarly, questions of fact exist regarding whether the unilateral alteration and recording of a deed to the disputed real property constituted fraud under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, summary judgment is inappropriate on the present record (see generally, Daliendo v. Johnson, 147 A.D.2d 312). Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.