THOMAS GILEWICZ PLAINTIFF APPELLANT v. BRYLIN HOSPITAL ALSO KNOWN AS BRYLIN HOSPITALS DR KANG BALVINDER BUFFALO GENERAL PSYCHIATRIC UNIT AND BUFFALO GENERAL HOSPITAL DEFENDANTS RESPONDENTS (2018)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

THOMAS GILEWICZ, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, v. BRYLIN HOSPITAL, ALSO KNOWN AS BRYLIN HOSPITALS, DR. KANG BALVINDER, BUFFALO GENERAL PSYCHIATRIC UNIT AND BUFFALO GENERAL HOSPITAL, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS.

CA 17–02032

Decided: June 08, 2018

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH G. MAKOWSKI, LLC, BUFFALO (JOSEPH MAKOWSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT. FELDMAN KIEFFER, LLP, BUFFALO (ADELA APRODU OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT BRYLIN HOSPITAL, ALSO KNOWN AS BRYLIN HOSPITALS. RICOTTA & VISCO, BUFFALO (TOMAS J. CALLOCCHIA OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT DR. KANG BALVINDER. ROACH, BROWN, MCCARTHY & GRUBER, P.C., BUFFALO (ADAM P. DEISINGER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS BUFFALO GENERAL PSYCHIATRIC

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

UNIT AND BUFFALO GENERAL HOSPITAL.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal from the order insofar as it denied leave to reargue is unanimously dismissed and the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this medical malpractice action, defendants moved for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the second amended complaints against them. Supreme Court granted the motions, and plaintiff moved for leave to renew and reargue. Plaintiff now appeals from an order denying his motion. We dismiss the appeal from that part of the order denying that part of plaintiff's motion seeking leave to reargue inasmuch as no appeal lies therefrom (see Kirchner v. County of Niagara, 153 AD3d 1572, 1574 [4th Dept 2017] ). Contrary to plaintiff's contention, the court properly denied that part of the motion seeking leave to renew. Plaintiff failed to submit “new facts not offered on the prior motion[s] that would change the prior determination” (CPLR 2221[e] [2]; see Matter of Kairis v. Graham, 118 AD3d 1494, 1494–1495 [4th Dept 2014] ). The alleged new facts were known to plaintiff and presented to the court at oral argument of defendants' motions.

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law