Practice point: A court
of original jurisdiction may entertain a motion for leave to renew based
on new facts even after an appellate court has affirmed the original
order. However, on a post-appeal motion to renew, the movant bears a
heavy burden of showing due diligence in presenting the new evidence
to the Supreme Court' in order to imbue the appellate decision with a modicum of certainty.
Student note: A motion for leave to renew must be based upon new facts not offered
on the prior motion that would change the prior determination, pursuant to CPLR
2221[e][2], and must offer reasonable justification for the failure
to present such facts on the prior motion, pursuant to CPLR 2221[e][3].
Case: Davi v. Occhino, NY Slip Op 02253 (2d Dept. 2014).
Here is the decision.
Monday's issue: A hearing on proper service of process.
