Poulard v Judkins

Annotate this Case
Poulard v Judkins 2013 NY Slip Op 00071 Decided on January 9, 2013 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on January 9, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, J.P.
THOMAS A. DICKERSON
L. PRISCILLA HALL
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.
2011-09844
(Index No. 15681/09)

[*1]Gilberte Poulard, appellant,

v

William A. Judkins, et al., respondents.




Harmon, Linder & Rogowsky (Mitchell Dranow, Sea Cliff, N.Y.,
of counsel), for appellant.
Newman Myers Kreines Gross Harris, P.C., New York, N.Y.
(Charles D. Cole, Jr., of counsel), for
respondents.


DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bayne, J.), dated September 9, 2011, which denied her motion, denominated as one for leave to renew and reargue, but which was, in actuality, one for leave to reargue her opposition to the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1), which had been granted in an order of the same court dated February 11, 2010.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The plaintiff's motion, denominated as one for leave to renew and reargue, did not offer any new facts not offered in support of the plaintiff's opposition to the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint based on documentary evidence. Therefore, the motion, though denominated as one for leave to renew and reargue, was, in actuality, one only for leave to reargue, the denial of which is not appealable (see CPLR 2221[d][2], [e][2]; Strunk v Revenge Cab Corp., 98 AD3d 1030, 1031; Blackwell v Mikevin Mgt. III, LLC, 88 AD3d 836, 838). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed.
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., DICKERSON, HALL and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.