| Clinkscale v Sampson |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 01524 [104 AD3d 722] |
| March 13, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Bessie Clinkscale, Respondent, v Gary Sampson etal., Appellants. |
—[*1] Fishman & Mallon, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Kevin C. Mallon of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful eviction, the defendantsappeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), dated May30, 2012, which denied their motion, in effect, for leave to renew that branch of a priormotion of the defendants Susan Sampson and 1997 Marcy Avenue, Inc., which waspursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against thosedefendants for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
This Court previously determined the issue raised on the instant appeal (see Clinkscale v Sampson, 74AD3d 721 [2010]). The law of the case doctrine forecloses re-examination of thatissue, absent a showing of subsequent evidence or a change in the law (see Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A.v Perez, 70 AD3d 817, 817 [2010], cert denied 562 US —, 131 SCt 648 [2010]). On this motion, in effect, for leave to renew that branch of a prior motionof the defendants Susan Sampson and 1997 Marcy Avenue, Inc., which was pursuant toCPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants for lackof personal jurisdiction, the defendants failed to present any new evidence which wouldchange the result, and did not demonstrate a change in the law. As we previouslydetermined, their contentions are without merit (see CPLR 3211 [e]). Dillon, J.P.,Balkin, Dickerson and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.