Raso v. Raso

1 Citing case

  1. Garieri v. International Business Machines

    275 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)   Cited 3 times

    The plaintiff's motion, denominated as one for renewal and reargument, was not based upon new evidence which was unavailable at the time of the original motion. Therefore, the motion was actually a motion for reargument (see, McCorvey v. Schoulder, A.D.2d [2d Dept., June 5, 2000]; Knutson v. Sand, 249 A.D.2d 451). As the Supreme Court reviewed the merits of the plaintiff's arguments, the court, in effect, granted reargument and then adhered to its original determination, and therefore, the order made upon reargument is appealable (see, Raso v. Raso, 237 A.D.2d 342; U-Eat-More Donut Corp. v. Tedel Estates, 237 A.D.2d 347-348).