History
  • No items yet
midpage
New York State Division of Human Rights v. Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corp.
605 N.Y.S.2d 996
N.Y. App. Div.
1993
Check Treatment

—Appeal from order insofar as it denied reargument unanimously dismissed and order affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court’s denial of petitioner’s motion insofar as it sought reargument is not properly before us because no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, Lindsay v Funtime, Inc., 184 AD2d 1036; Pennino v Lasersurge, Inc., 178 AD2d 939). The court properly denied the motion insofar as it sought renewal. The additional evidence supporting the motion was not newly discovered and petitioner did not provide a valid excuse for his failure to submit that evidence with the petition (see, Lindsay v Funtime, Inc., supra; Town of Niagara v City of Niagara Falls, 175 AD2d 571, 572). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hayes, J. — Reargument and Renewal.) Present— Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: New York State Division of Human Rights v. Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Nov 19, 1993
Citation: 605 N.Y.S.2d 996
Docket Number: Appeal No. 2
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In