Case Name: New York State Division of Human Rights, on Complaint of John F. Elko, Appellant, v. Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corporation, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-11-19
Citations: 198 A.D.2d 761
Docket Number: Appeal No. 2
Parties: New York State Division of Human Rights, on Complaint of John F. Elko, Appellant, v Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corporation, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 198
Pages: 761–761

Head Matter:
New York State Division of Human Rights, on Complaint of John F. Elko, Appellant, v Filtration Products Group of Snyder-General Corporation, Respondent.
(Appeal No. 2.)
[605 NYS2d 996]

Opinion:
—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.