From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Renke v. Kwiecinski

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 25, 2015
126 A.D.3d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2013-06619 Index No. 17506/08

03-25-2015

John K. Renke II, respondent, v. Joyce Kwiecinski, appellant.

Joyce Kwiecinski, Long Beach, N.Y., appellant pro se. DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Michael Schwarz and Frank Haupel of counsel), for respondent.


CHERYL E. CHAMBERS

LEONARD B. AUSTIN

ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

Joyce Kwiecinski, Long Beach, N.Y., appellant pro se.

DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Michael Schwarz and Frank Haupel of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to enforce a foreign judgment, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), dated May 2, 2013, which denied her motion for leave to renew and reargue, among other things, her prior motion to vacate the foreign judgment, which had been denied in an order of the same court dated March 23, 2009.

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order dated May 2, 2013, as denied that branch of the defendant'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 dated May 2, 2013, is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

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

The denial of a motion for leave to reargue is not appealable (see Bank of N.Y. v Segui, 120 AD3d 1369, 1370) and, therefore, the defendant's appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of her motion which was for leave to reargue must be dismissed.

That branch of the motion which was for leave to renew was properly denied as, to the extent it was based upon new facts not offered on the prior motion, there was no reasonable justification offered for the failure to present such facts on the prior motion, and, in any event, none of the new facts offered would change the prior determination (see CPLR 2221[e]).

MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court


Summaries of

Renke v. Kwiecinski

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 25, 2015
126 A.D.3d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Renke v. Kwiecinski

Case Details

Full title:John K. Renke II, respondent, v. Joyce Kwiecinski, appellant.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 25, 2015

Citations

126 A.D.3d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 2466
3 N.Y.S.3d 617

Citing Cases

MP v. Davidsohn

The defendant moved, among other things, for leave to reargue, and the court, in an order dated October 25,…