Opinion
May 30, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.).
Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
Because the plaintiffs' motion to reargue and renew was not based on any additional, material facts, it is properly deemed a motion to reargue, and no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, Savory v Romex Realty Corp., 194 A.D.2d 601; Foley v Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558). Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.