descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

We're Associates, Inc. v. F.W. Koehler & Sons, Inc.

Citations: 213 A.D.2d 477; 624 N.Y.S.2d 886; 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2695

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; March 12, 1995; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In an appeal concerning a breach of contract claim, the plaintiff sought to challenge an order from the Supreme Court of Nassau County, which denied the plaintiff's motion to reargue or renew the dismissal of its first cause of action. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, citing that the evidence the plaintiff wished to present was already known to them at the time of the original motions and that no justification was provided for failing to submit it earlier. The court classified the plaintiff's motion as essentially a request for reargument, for which no appeal is permitted. The dismissal included an order for one bill of costs to the respondents, who appeared separately and filed separate briefs. The decision was concurred by Justices Thompson, Lawrence, O'Brien, and Krausman.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appealability of Motion to Reargue

Application: The appellate court determined that the plaintiff's motion was essentially a request for reargument, which is not subject to appeal.

Reasoning: The court classified the plaintiff's motion as essentially a request for reargument, for which no appeal is permitted.

Awarding of Costs in Separate Appeals

Application: The court awarded one bill of costs to the respondents, as they appeared separately and filed separate briefs.

Reasoning: The dismissal included an order for one bill of costs to the respondents, who appeared separately and filed separate briefs.

Requirement for New Evidence in Motions to Renew

Application: The appellate court highlighted that the evidence the plaintiff wanted to present was already known at the time of the original motions, and the plaintiff did not justify why it was not submitted earlier.

Reasoning: The appellate court dismissed the appeal, citing that the evidence the plaintiff wished to present was already known to them at the time of the original motions and that no justification was provided for failing to submit it earlier.