The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the motion since it was
not based on new facts that would change the prior determination, as required by CPLR
2221[e]. The purportedly new facts concerning the failure to timely file a satisfaction of judgment pursuant to a prior stipulation were wholly unrelated to the court's prior
determination that the stipulation was not the product of duress. In addition, the movant, under the guise of renewal, improperly advances a new legal theory - breach of the stipulation - rather than the basis of the original motion, which was the stipulation's invalidity.
Case: Atlas v. Smily, NY Slip Op 09248 (1st Dep't December 28. 2017)
Here is the decision.
