Opinion
October 30, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenstein, J.).
Ordered the appeal is dismissed, with costs payable by the appellant to the plaintiff-respondent.
Although the appellant denominated its motion as one to renew, because it offered additional evidence which was in its possession at the time of the previous motion, we deem it to be a motion to reargue (see, First Fed. Sav. Loan Assn. v. Ruby Land Dev., 215 A.D.2d 721; Price v. Palagonia, 212 A.D.2d 765; Matter of Aetna Cas. Sur. Co. v. Pellegrino, 203 A.D.2d 457).
The denial of a motion to reargue is not appealable (see, Michaelson v. Scaduto, 205 A.D.2d 507). Bracken, J.P., Santucci, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.