Practice point: The general rule is that successive motions for summary judgment will not be
entertained in the absence of a showing of newly discovered evidence or other
sufficient cause. Although newly discovered evidence may
consist of deposition testimony which was not elicited until after the
date of a prior order denying an earlier motion for summary judgment, such evidence is not considered newly discovered simply because it was not submitted on the previous motion. Rather, the evidence that was not submitted in support of the previous summary judgment motion must be used to
establish facts that were not available to the party at the time it
made its initial motion for summary judgment and which could not have
been established through alternative evidentiary means.
Student note: Successive motions for summary judgment should
not be made based upon facts or arguments which could have been
submitted on the original motion for summary judgment.
Case: Vinar v. Litman, NY Slip Op 06675 (2d Dept. 2013).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: A fall on the sidewalk.
.
