October 11, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Krausman, J.).
Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff's motion must be considered a motion to reargue rather than to renew, because he presented no new facts which were not presented in opposition to the original motion (see, Caffee v. Arnold, 104 A.D.2d 352). No appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see, DeFreitas v. Board of Educ., 129 A.D.2d 672). Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Altman, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.