| Jordan v Yardeny |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 04423 [84 AD3d 1172] |
| May 24, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Steven Jordan, Respondent, v Yakov Yardeny,Appellant. |
—[*1] Meyerowitz Jekielek PLLC, New York, N.Y. (Ira S. Meyerowitz of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, thedefendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), enteredOctober 29, 2009, which denied that branch of his motion which was, in effect, for leave torenew his prior motion to vacate a judgment of the same court entered June 7, 2006, upon hisdefault in answering or appearing, which had been denied in an order of the same court datedSeptember 14, 2006.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A motion for leave to renew must be based upon new facts not offered on a prior motion thatwould change the prior determination, and set forth a reasonable justification for the failure topresent such facts on the prior motion (see CPLR 2221 [e]; Swedish v Beizer, 51AD3d 1008, 1010 [2008]). The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant'smotion which was, in effect, for leave to renew his prior motion to vacate the default judgment,as the new facts proffered would not have changed the prior determination (see CPLR2103 [b]; Cole v Young, 28 AD3d 702, 703 [2006]; Jackson-Cutler v Long, 2AD3d 590 [2003]; Barbagallo v Nationwise Exterminating & Deodorizing, 260 AD2d518, 519 [1999]). Furthermore, the defendant failed to set forth a reasonable justification for thefailure to present the new facts on the prior motion. Mastro, J.P., Florio, Leventhal, Belen andCohen, JJ., concur.