Diaz v Reinersman

Diaz v Reinersman 2013 NY Slip Op 06985 Decided on October 29, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 29, 2013
Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Freedman, Richter, JJ.
10898N 23759/06

[*1]Jaiden Diaz, etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v

Lilly Alcira Reinersman, etc., et al., Defendants-Appellants.




McAloon & Friedman, P.C., New York (Gina Bernardi Di
Folco of counsel), for appellants.
Ephrem J. Wertenteil, New York , for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered June 8, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' cross motion for summary judgment and, upon reargument, denied defendants' earlier cross motion to compel disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in considering arguments addressed for the first time on reply, in support of reargument, to which defendants had an opportunity to respond (see Rostant v Swersky, 79 AD3d 456 [1st Dept 2010]). Upon reargument, defendants' failure to annex "an affirmation that counsel has conferred with counsel for the opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the motion" (22 NYCRR 202.7[a]), was properly found to warrant denial of the
cross motion to compel (see Molyneaux v City of New York, 64 AD3d
406 [1st Dept 2009]).

We have considered appellants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 29, 2013

CLERK