From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Savory v. Romex Realty Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 7, 1993
194 A.D.2d 601 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

June 7, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.).


Ordered that the appeal from the order entered April 23, 1991, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered January 29, 1991 is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion, inter alia, to amend the complaint by increasing the ad damnum clause. The plaintiff failed to submit a medical affidavit or affirmation specifying a change in her condition, any injuries which had not been considered previously, or the extent to which the condition had worsened (see, Dolan v. Garden City Union Free School Dist., 113 A.D.2d 781, 785).

Because the plaintiff's purported motion to renew and reargue was not based on any additional material facts, it is properly deemed one to reargue. No appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, Foley v. Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, 568). Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Eiber, O'Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Savory v. Romex Realty Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 7, 1993
194 A.D.2d 601 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Savory v. Romex Realty Corporation

Case Details

Full title:BEVERLY A. SAVORY, Appellant, v. ROMEX REALTY CORPORATION, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 7, 1993

Citations

194 A.D.2d 601 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
599 N.Y.S.2d 997

Citing Cases

Weiler v. Cranny

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs. Because the plaintiffs' motion to reargue and renew was not…

Teper v. East Penn Trucking Co.

Contrary to the defendants' contention, no triable issue of fact exists with regard to the defendants'…