Parmanand v. Centeno

Summary

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed an order denying the plaintiff leave to renew prior summary judgment submissions in a wrongful death action arising from a pedestrian’s death after being struck by a vehicle. The court held that the plaintiff failed to show that the omitted police report would have changed the prior determinations, as required for renewal under CPLR 2221(e).

Holdings

1. Leave to renew requires new facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination and a reasonable justification for failing to present those facts previously; the plaintiff failed to satisfy that standard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiff established grounds for leave to renew her prior cross-motion for summary judgment on liability and her opposition to the defendants' summary-judgment motion.
2. Whether the newly submitted police report constituted new material that would have changed the prior determinations and whether the plaintiff reasonably justified its omission from the prior submissions.

Disposition

affirmed