Opinion
June 6, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.).
Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.
All of the facts and evidence submitted in support of the defendant's motion were available and known to it at the time of submission of the original motion by the plaintiff (see, Klein v Mount Sinai Hosp., 121 A.D.2d 164; McRory v Craft Architectural Metals Corp., 112 A.D.2d 358; Foley v Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, affd on remand 86 A.D.2d 887, lv denied 56 N.Y.2d 507). The defense counsel attempted to justify the failure to submit the requisite evidentiary material in opposition to plaintiff's original motion, inter alia, for summary judgment by claiming that he believed the "plaintiff's moving papers were insufficient as a matter of law". We find this purported "excuse" to be wholly unsatisfactory. The defendant should have "laid bare all of [its] evidence on the original motion" (see, Caffee v Arnold, 104 A.D.2d 352). Accordingly, the order appealed from, in effect, denies reargument. Since no appeal lies from an order denying reargument, the appeal is dismissed (see, DeFreitas v Board of Educ., 129 A.D.2d 672). Thompson, J.P., Weinstein, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.