In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Franco, J.), dated March 21, 2003, which denied their motion for leave to renew the defendant’s prior motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to renew the prior summary judgment motion, as it was based on evidence that could have been discovered earlier with due diligence (see CPLR 2221 [e]; Dawkins v Long Is. R.R.,
The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit (see Martinez v City of New York,
