| NYCTL 1999-1 Trust v Surf Coney Is., Inc. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 05306 [63 AD3d 1023] |
| June 23, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| NYCTL 1999-1 Trust, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v SurfConey Island, Inc., et al., Respondents. |
—[*1] Barry S. Gedan, Riverdale, N.Y., for respondent Surf Coney Island, Inc.
In an action to foreclose a tax lien, the plaintiff NYCTL 1999-1 Trust appeals from an orderof the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated February 20, 2008, which denied thosebranches of the plaintiffs' motion which were for leave to renew and reargue the plaintiffs' priormotion for summary judgment on the complaint, which had been denied in an order dated July25, 2007, and the prior cross motion of the defendants Surf Coney Island, Inc., and Kansas FriedChicken, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint which had been granted in theorder dated July 25, 2007.
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of the plaintiffs'motion which was for leave to reargue is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denyingreargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent Surf Coney Island, Inc.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of theplaintiffs' motion which was for leave to renew. The plaintiffs failed to present a reasonablejustification for their failure to present certain "new facts" on the original motion and crossmotion (CPLR 2221 [e] [3]; see O'Connell v Post, 27 AD3d 631 [2006]; Renna vGullo, 19 AD3d 472 [2005]). In any event, those facts would not have changed the priordeterminations (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]; Renna v Gullo, 19 AD3d at 472). Fisher,J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Leventhal, JJ., concur.